Critique Male & Female Scorpion Fly Stack

Tintin124

Tintin124

Messages
8,826
Name
Bryn
Edit My Images
Yes
As most know I have been after scorpion flies for a while and whilst I couldn't go out to meadow as far to windy here (didn't see point) I had amazing luck in my own back yard and in my tree both a female and male appeared. :banana:

A quick stack in Zerene. 2 shots to get tail and face in focus. @Spiritflier this is a Male.

1. Male

Male Scorpion Stack x2 shots 02 by bthomas124, on Flickr

2. Female

Female Scorpion Fly-1709-01 by bthomas124, on Flickr

All comments welcome and appreciated. More coming this eve...

:ty:
 
Wow. What a monster :)

Very good shots Bryn. That 'stinger' looks very menacing.
 
Yayyy for you, great shots and in your own backyard, who would have thought that...lol
Ps, Do they use the stinger for anything ?
 
IanClark said:
Wow. What a monster :)
Very good shots Bryn. That 'stinger' looks very menacing.
Click to expand...
Graham said:
Yayyy for you, great shots and in your own backyard, who would have thought that...lol
Ps, Do they use the stinger for anything ?
Click to expand...

Thanks guys my guess the stinger is used to paralyse prey just like a scorpion does or it maybe just a defence mechanism. They are truly beautiful in an ugly way I want a proper face on shot.

Carlh said:
wow bryn - that first shot, it looks like some freaky scorpion with that curled tail.
Click to expand...

Think thats why its called a Scorpion Fly lol

Carlh said:
Am going to have to visit your back garden, its like a zoo ! hahahah
Click to expand...

For the serious lack of Plants I am extremely lucking cause my garden backs onto a wood. You are welcome any time.
 
I prefer the second as the exposure is better but both good
The "stinger" is used for mating, you're actually admiring his genitalia :oops: :$
 
NSNO said:
I prefer the second as the exposure is better but both good
The "stinger" is used for mating, you're actually admiring his genitalia :oops: :$
Click to expand...
OMG :eek:
 
NSNO said:
I prefer the second as the exposure is better but both good
The "stinger" is used for mating, you're actually admiring his genitalia :oops: :$
Click to expand...

Are you seeing it as too dark or too light? I have 2 versions. I made it darker to show the detail better.

Guess we now know it's it dangle guess next challenge is to capture 2 mating maybe that's what they were planning as per all the Flies recently.
 
The second shot is the better of the two. It's decently composed and has the whole subject in the frame, where as the first isn't and hasn't.
 
Definitely the 2nd shot for me, much better with the whole insect in view and hes not quite displaying his genitalia so proudly :)
 
OK going to stick my neck out but I don't get the obsession with whole subject in frame. I wanted to be as close as possible which has meant I have cut off a little off the antennae (I could cheat and shorten them by cloning but not a fan of that). Some critters you speckled bush cricket you would always have a very pulled back image.

It's a 2 shot stack to show of its wonderful nuts but have head in focus too which I think I have achieved. Maybe should have done a stack and pano :)

As for composition I agree not the best, I was at full stretch as it was above head height in a tree but I should have done better.

@BRASH @jakeblu @deno thanks for your comments and will take note what you have said.
 
Tintin124 said:
OK going to stick my neck out but I don't get the obsession with whole subject in frame. I wanted to be as close as possible which has meant I have cut off a little off the antennae (I could cheat and shorten them by cloning but not a fan of that). Some critters you speckled bush cricket you would always have a very pulled back image.

It's a 2 shot stack to show of its wonderful nuts but have head in focus too which I think I have achieved. Maybe should have done a stack and pano :)

As for composition I agree not the best, I was at full stretch as it was above head height in a tree but I should have done better.

@BRASH @jakeblu @deno thanks for your comments and will take note what you have said.
Click to expand...


It's not an obsession but simply good technique for this type of shot to have the entire subject in the frame if not it's poor composition. No-one said it was easy but you stuck these up for 'critique' and the faults have been pointed out. The reasons and excuses, whatever you want to call them are all very well but to improve you need to take the points on board and put them into practice, which you seem to be inferring you will do so job done.
 
BRASH said:
It's not an obsession but simply good technique for this type of shot to have the entire subject in the frame if not it's poor composition. No-one said it was easy but you stuck these up for 'critique' and the faults have been pointed out. The reasons and excuses, whatever you want to call them are all very well but to improve you need to take the points on board and put them into practice, which you seem to be inferring you will do so job done.
Click to expand...

With macro the normal rules for getting the whole subject in the frame don't always apply. If you're shooting at 1:1 or greater than you often can't fit everything in but I'd agree that the composition isn't the best even taking that into account
 
Tintin124 said:
Are you seeing it as too dark or too light? I have 2 versions. I made it darker to show the detail better.

Guess we now know it's it dangle guess next challenge is to capture 2 mating maybe that's what they were planning as per all the Flies recently.
Click to expand...

I meant that the first has quite harsh lighting but the second is much better
 
NSNO said:
I meant that the first has quite harsh lighting but the second is much better
Click to expand...

Thats interesting guess ETTL has sent out too much light on it then... there is no blown highlights so will go ahead and look at the PP again.

Thanks for coming back and explaining.
 
I have to say, of the two, the first is my favourite. I've flicked back and forth between the two to try and figure out why, as I fully agree the second is better composed, however...

  • The subject itself is far more interesting in the first. The scorpion tail is worth it's weight in gold (ok that's probably not very much). I showed it to a colleague at work and he was convinced it was a photoshop job of an anteater, a cricket and a scorpion. It took a good bit of googling to convince him otherwise.
  • The angle on the first is slightly lower. We are almost eye to eye with the subject here which makes it that bit more dynamic.
  • I like to get a good look at the subject and the cropped antenna don't really bother me here, as it's more about the face (and tail in this case).

I think one of the issues here is that it falls foul of some rules of composition, but doesn't break them enough.

Personally I would take it into photoshop, rotate it a bit and spend some time with the clone brush and recompose the background (I have no qualms about doing this with my own images) to improve it. The second one is a very fine image, but the first one wins for me for the above reasons.
 
Last edited:
The non stacked one actually looks sharper and better focused than the stack
 
TimmyG said:
I have to say, of the two, the first is my favourite. I've flicked back and forth between the two to try and figure out why, as I fully agree the second is better composed, however...

  • The subject itself is far more interesting in the first. The scorpion tail is worth it's weight in gold (ok that's probably not very much). I showed it to a colleague at work and he was convinced it was a photoshop job of an anteater, a cricket and a scorpion. It took a good bit of googling to convince him otherwise.
  • The angle on the first is slightly lower. We are almost eye to eye with the subject here which makes it that bit more dynamic.
  • I like to get a good look at the subject and the cropped antenna don't really bother me here, as it's more about the face (and tail in this case).

I think one of the issues here is that it falls foul of some rules of composition, but doesn't break them enough.

Personally I would take it into photoshop, rotate it a bit and spend some time with the clone brush and recompose the background (I have no qualms about doing this with my own images) to improve it. The second one is a very fine image, but the first one wins for me for the above reasons.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the comprehensive answer there Tim, think we are on same page here... sounds like you have just given me a winter job lol :ROFLMAO:

Did you see my pulled back shot?
 
NSNO said:
The non stacked one actually looks sharper and better focused than the stack
Click to expand...

That's probably my lack of stacking experience TBH... Suspect that it hasn't aligned completely accurately or subject moved slightly seems that way in the head as both singular images look fine and sharp.
 
Last edited:
Tintin124 said:
Did you see my pulled back shot?
Click to expand...
Not before I posted my response (I think I had the thread open for a while and didn't refresh). I like the alternate one, technically it is better, but I still like the closer version and both still need rotating imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top