Some other macro shots dating last year...

This section is "Macro and close-up" so you are right to post your shots here :)
 
:agree:

Were these shot with natural lighting or was flash involved? As ladybirds are notoriously shinny so have to be so careful how you shoot them.

#1/2/3 I would crop a little off the top as its wasted negative space, and #3 almost looks like its about to go over a waterfall and as such I would rotate CW a tad but a brilliant find. Maybe you could have shot it with the whole leaf covering the bottom of the frame and you see the ladybird daring to go to the edge :)
 
Welcome to the world of small things Sandrine. Some thoughts.

I don't know if you are into post processing, but often some quite simple adjustments can make a big difference. As to whether to do any of these things (there are lots of possibilities), and if so how much, is very much a matter of personal taste. It takes time to experiment with various things, listen to other people's suggestions, discover your own preferences and slowly develop your own "style". It's the same with capturing photos IMO; I think it's a good idea to try different angles, distances, camera settings etc for a particular scene, once again searching for some combination that pleases your eye. I very often take multiple shots of a scene in this way and only find out when I come to select and process them which one(s), if any, I like.

With my particular tastes (and yours may well differ), one thing I would be inclined to do with the first three is to reduce the highlights. Here on the right you can see the effect of doing that for the first one. I have done this for the other examples shown below. (I've also sharpened them all slightly.)


NOT MY IMAGE 1 - gtcas1976 ladybird 1 - Highlight reduction
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

Bryn has made some suggestions about cropping. That is another thing which can have a big impact on an image. There are some rules of thumb about cropping - you may want to look up "Rule of Thirds". I would take notice of these - they are often helpful. But not always. Sometimes it pays to do something that goes against one or other of these rules of thumb because there are other considerations that have a stronger impact on the image.

Let's look at the second image. Here it is, uncropped.


NOT MY IMAGE 3a - gtcas1976 ladybird 2 - uncropped
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

One of the rules of thumb, with animals, is that it is often best not to have the subject right in the middle of the frame, as is the case here. It can look better to have the subject looking, and/or moving "into the frame", which in this case would mean having it more towards the right, like this perhaps,


NOT MY IMAGE 3 - gtcas1976 ladybird 2 - Crop2
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

or this,


NOT MY IMAGE 4 - gtcas1976 ladybird 2 - Crop3
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

I tend to look carefully at the backgrounds when deciding how to crop. In this case I really like the backgrounds and so I don't want to remove too much of them. As an example of how differently people can view images (and you really can't please all the people all the time), Bryn sees the top of the images as negative space, of which there is too much, whereas I see it as positively contributing shapes that to my eye enhance the image, which is why I've gone for a taller, thinner crop in the second version above. In fact, I like the backgrounds so much that in this case I'm very comfortable with the original, despite the central placement of the subject. That doesn't trouble me in this case, because I get a real feeling of the ladybird being there, out in the open, with a big environment all around it,

Bryn mentioned rotating the third one. A good point. The problem is that if you rotate the image you have to crop it to get rid of empty areas in the corners, and you end up with something like this,


NOT MY IMAGE 5 - gtcas1976 ladybird 3 - Rotate2
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

Here the subject is (just) "on the wrong side", as it is "looking out of the picture" rather than looking in. Perhaps what one might prefer is something like this,


NOT MY IMAGE 6 - gtcas1976 ladybird 3 - Rotate, Stretch 3
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

but to get that (without cheating like I have here :)) you would need to have captured the image with an eye to the the composition. FWIW, I often (when the subject lets me) capture different compositions to have some options to play with when selecting and processing the images.

For the first image, I couldn't find any alternative crops that I liked the look of any better than the original. This has to do with not wanting to truncate the shape in the top right or to cut off the edge of the leaf at the bottom right. As always, this is personal taste, and yours is as valid as mine or anyone else's. We all quite literally see things differently.


NOT MY IMAGE 2a - gtcas1976 ladybird 1 - Not wanting to crop
by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

As to the flower, it too is very central. That can work fine with flowers, but for my taste if the full emphasis is going to fall on the flower, like it does here with it so central and big in the frame (rather than having it a bit smaller with an environment that sets if off nicely), then I'd prefer to see more of it in focus, which would mean a smaller aperture (and a longer exposure and/or higher ISO). Depending on the conditions (breeze, light level, and whether shooting hand-held or with a monopod, tripod or similar), that might or might not be practical. And in any case it might not be to your taste, which is what matters here. (And a lot of people generally prefer a narrow depth of field, where only a relatively thin "slice" of the picture is in focus.)
 
Last edited:
Hi Tintin,

Thank you for commenting on this lot as well as previous one. :)

Were these shot with natural lighting or was flash involved? As ladybirds are notoriously shinny so have to be so careful how you shoot them.

Honestly? I cannot remember but looking at the info displayer on my Flickr account for this photo, it says that the Flash was off and did not fire. So no flash was used for this photo.

Maybe you could have shot it with the whole leaf covering the bottom of the frame and you see the ladybird daring to go to the edge :)

I remember wanting to do that, but this was taken in my in-laws garden and there is a gate where those flowers were that unable me to take the angle I wanted and back then I didn't have the tripod. However, if I do get a similar opportunity, elsewhere I'll remember your suggestion and try and create that dramatic effect. :)
 
Wow Nick, you're exactly what I need! :)
Thank you so much for all your advice.

To answer some of your questions or comments:

I don't know if you are into post processing, but often some quite simple adjustments can make a big difference. As to whether to do any of these things (there are lots of possibilities), and if so how much, is very much a matter of personal taste. It takes time to experiment with various things, listen to other people's suggestions, discover your own preferences and slowly develop your own "style". It's the same with capturing photos IMO; I think it's a good idea to try different angles, distances, camera settings etc for a particular scene, once again searching for some combination that pleases your eye. I very often take multiple shots of a scene in this way and only find out when I come to select and process them which one(s), if any, I like.

Yes, i realise that I can use editing softwares, and in time, I probably will, but at the moment, as I'm learning, I'm trying not to 'cheat' so to speak. I want to learn to frame the pictures well in the first place, learn about lighting, how to get the best focus etc. That is why I'm publishing on here the actual un-touched photos, so that I can get some of the best and most critical feedback. That way I can only improve and then when I feel I got better and understand the basics, I will play with the photo editing tools to create those stunning shots. ;)

With my particular tastes (and yours may well differ), one thing I would be inclined to do with the first three is to reduce the highlights. Here on the right you can see the effect of doing that for the first one. I have done this for the other examples shown below. (I've also sharpened them all slightly.)

I can indeed see a big difference. After your tweaking, I can see that the leaf seems less over-exposed and the ladybird, after the sharpening, stands out more. The colours are generally more vibrant.

Bryn has made some suggestions about cropping. That is another thing which can have a big impact on an image. There are some rules of thumb about cropping - you may want to look up "Rule of Thirds". I would take notice of these - they are often helpful. But not always. Sometimes it pays to do something that goes against one or other of these rules of thumb because there are other considerations that have a stronger impact on the image.

I remember reading about the Rule of Thirds not so long ago, but it was after taking those shots. I remember reading about it in terms of taking the photo, but of course there is no reason why it can't be used when cropping photos. I shall remember that rule more when I try to take shots but also when I decide to edit my photos more.

I tend to look carefully at the backgrounds when deciding how to crop. In this case I really like the backgrounds and so I don't want to remove too much of them. As an example of how differently people can view images (and you really can't please all the people all the time), Bryn sees the top of the images as negative space, of which there is too much, whereas I see it as positively contributing shapes that to my eye enhance the image, which is why I've gone for a taller, thinner crop in the second version above. In fact, I like the backgrounds so much that in this case I'm very comfortable with the original, despite the central placement of the subject. That doesn't trouble me in this case, because I get a real feeling of the ladybird being there, out in the open, with a big environment all around it,

That's exactly why I LOVE this photo, even if it's not perfect. I actually do love the background as it shows this tiny insect living in such a big wild world. I dunno I feel it gives the viewer a kind of perspective. :)

Here the subject is (just) "on the wrong side", as it is "looking out of the picture" rather than looking in. Perhaps what one might prefer is something like this

I really like this new arrangement, the sharpening, the colours, the cropping. It's given my photo a totally new dimension and I see the benefits of using photo editing. :)

but to get that (without cheating like I have here :)) you would need to have captured the image with an eye to the the composition. FWIW, I often (when the subject lets me) capture different compositions to have some options to play with when selecting and processing the images.

Like I said a bit above, for now I kind of want to abstain 'cheating' so that i can learn the techniques, the compositions, the framing etc… but give me 6 months or so and I might start 'cheating'. ;)


As to the flower, it too is very central. That can work fine with flowers, but for my taste if the full emphasis is going to fall on the flower, like it does here with it so central and big in the frame (rather than having it a bit smaller with an environment that sets if off nicely), then I'd prefer to see more of it in focus, which would mean a smaller aperture (and a longer exposure and/or higher ISO). Depending on the conditions (breeze, light level, and whether shooting hand-held or with a monopod, tripod or similar), that might or might not be practical. And in any case it might not be to your taste, which is what matters here. (And a lot of people generally prefer a narrow depth of field, where only a relatively thin "slice" of the picture is in focus.)

I personally not super keen on my flower but it's nice to get someone else's perspective also as I can be overly critical of any work i do. It literally was my first shot with this camera. I was trying it out. I was working the zoom, not understanding what I was doing. I still need to learn about controlling aperture etc. I've got to admit that at the moment I'm using the camera on automatic mode most of the time. Once I've read about aperture settings, exposure and all the technical stuff, I'll start experimenting with the manual side of things.

Thank you so much. I really value all your comments and will take them on board. :)
 
Yes, i realise that I can use editing softwares, and in time, I probably will, but at the moment, as I'm learning, I'm trying not to 'cheat' so to speak. I want to learn to frame the pictures well in the first place, learn about lighting, how to get the best focus etc. That is why I'm publishing on here the actual un-touched photos, so that I can get some of the best and most critical feedback. That way I can only improve and then when I feel I got better and understand the basics, I will play with the photo editing tools to create those stunning shots. ;)


Like I said a bit above, for now I kind of want to abstain 'cheating' so that i can learn the techniques, the compositions, the framing etc… but give me 6 months or so and I might start 'cheating'. ;)

Just a thought on the subject of "cheating". There's only one thing I did to your photos that I would regard as "cheating", where I stretched the right hand side of the third image and compressed the left hand side, to illustrate how the scene might have looked if captured with different framing. I regard this as "cheating" because it created a geometry/placement of objects and space that didn't exist in the real world; it was artificial. For the rest, the cropping and the sharpening, and other things that we commonly do to images, for example to alter the distribution of light and dark and the balance of colours, I don't regard any of that as cheating. In some cases it is done to enhance the visibility of some aspects of the image and de-emphasise others, and sometimes, as with colour balance, it can be done to correct the way the image came out of the camera and make it look more like what the scene actually looked like. And remember that even if you don't do any post processing, the camera has already done a fair amount of post processing, with decisions taken about colour and light distribution, before you get to see the image on the LCD or download it to your PC. So, all photos are post processed. The question then becomes one of how much (and how soon) do you want to take control of that post processing, versus leaving it to the engineers who designed the generic post processing methods built into the camera.

It's a complicated business and can get a bit philosophical and tiresome, but my concern here is that you shouldn't think that post processing is in some sense "naughty". I see the activities of going out to find photos, capturing them, selecting which ones to work on and preparing them for viewing on screen or paper as stages in a single process, of which post processing is for me at least an integral part. It's good that you want to get to grips with composition and other aspects that you can manipulate with a good capture technique, but I suspect you may want to start doing some post processing of your own sooner rather than later.

But I can see where you are coming from, and I can see the logic of it, so I'll back off for now and hold my tongue about any post processing issues for your images until you are ready to travel on that road. :)
 
Last edited:
Oh i didn't mean to offend or upset anyone when I mentioned 'cheating'. Of course, I do know that post-processing really is not a way to cheat. I'm really not trying to say that all the photographers in the world are cheats because they are using photo editing software to improve their photos.

I know and I'm totally aware that post-processing is an essential part of the journey, from choosing a subject, taking photos, choosing the best ones and making sure the shots look stunning. I totally understand and I'm sure you're right in saying that I probably will soon do it. In fact I probably will do it soon to the photos that I have uploaded on here, now that i got some really interesting and constructive feedback that I can learn from.

I just feel that at this stage, if I was to post-process photos and load them up on here for feedback, I'd feel like i was cheating myself and I'm worried that I may not get the most critical comments that I'm looking for. Being such a novice in photography, these comments are invaluable to me. :)

Hope this clarifies my comments above. :)
 
GardenersHelper, you were right… only a few weeks later and I'm starting to post-process… just cropping, playing with highlights and contrasts mainly, but still I've started and i'm enjoying it… lol ;)
 
Back
Top