Critique Shaggy

TimmyG

TimmyG

Messages
4,779
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
Another one from a few weeks ago. This is a 4 image stack of one of the UK's larger species of Springtail (at around 4mm).

Orchesella villosa by Tim.Garlick, on Flickr

This still isn't as sharp as I would like, but I'm convinced this is down to not getting the lighting right. I think I lost a lot of contrast, and the flash was directly above the subject here. May have been better at a slight angle.
 
Did you get one of Scooby or Daphne? ;) hummer hummer....

I'm looking on my phone and contrast looks good to me and I like the lighting.

I do put my light at a slight angle using the ball head but I do use a more powerful light than you do.
 
Thanks Bryn, I think it looks better smaller (or as a thumbnail), but if you take a look when you are next at your computer, you might see what I mean. I can certainly see a difference compared to some earlier shots with my previous setup. More work to do. I hope I solve it soon or I may have to spend some time troubleshooting and doing comparison tests! I'm not very good at that type of thing, I prefer to just let @GardenersHelper do all the hard work and learn from his conclusions ;)

  • I'm pretty sure it's not a focusing issue. The EOS-M uses a hybrid auto-focusing system (which means that there shouldn't be a need for micro-adjustments with various lenses), and I think it's unlikely that the LCD screen would misrepresent the focus point. Obviously I'm not using auto-focus at all, but I may need to do further research here.
  • I don't think it's a lens issue. I'm using the same lens as I always have, and it shouldn't matter which camera I mount it on (see above). I have added the extender, but I've done shots without it and get a similar result.
  • It could be technique. As the camera is small, maybe I am moving it slightly without realising. There is no nice, big hand grip anymore to suit my manly hands! I may have to pay more attention to this in future or do some testing from a tripod.
  • Lighting is completely different and I suspect this is the most likely culprit. The flash itself is positioned right on top of the subject, so I think this results in losing contrast (and perhaps some stray light getting into the lens). Also, I think I'm not converting the small flash size into a large "apparent" light source for the subject. Once I have figured this out I think I 'll notice much better result. Of course I'm try to make something light weight, but durable which is where the difficulties are. Also I haven't invested huge amounts of time here, building quick proto-types rather than investing the time in something more rugged.
 
@TimmyG I think this is a good shot Tim, However if you don't me saying especially as I'm very new to macro/close up photography so certainly don't want to offend in any way. But this doesn't look like a focussing issue to me, it looks more like camera movement.;) I agree with Bryn though the contrast & lighting look just fine to me.(y)

Only my opinion of coarse.,

George.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
@TimmyG this doesn't look like a focussing issue to me, it looks more like camera movement.
Click to expand...

If flash is the dominant source of light then the effective shutter speed is the length of the (very brief) flash pulse, which pretty much rules out camera movement issues, even at very high magnification, With Tim's lighting setup, and assuming he used his maximum flash sync shutter speed or close to it, and assuming he wasn't using FP/HSS flash, I imagine flash was the dominant source of light, in which case I doubt the problem would have been down to camera movement.

But there are some ifs and buts in this, so I could be wrong. Well, I could be wrong anyway of course, for entirely different reasons!
 
GardenersHelper said:
If flash is the dominant source of light then the effective shutter speed is the length of the (very brief) flash pulse, which pretty much rules out camera movement issues, even at very high magnification, With Tim's lighting setup, and assuming he used his maximum flash sync shutter speed or close to it, and assuming he wasn't using FP/HSS flash, I imagine flash was the dominant source of light, in which case I doubt the problem would have been down to camera movement.

But there are some ifs and buts in this, so I could be wrong. Well, I could be wrong anyway of course, for entirely different reasons!
Click to expand...



You're perfectly correct Nick in your assumption providing the sole light source was flash. But if there was any ambient light around then that could show up some camera movement. I was just trying to help in sorting the problem out by offering an opinion.

George.
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
@TimmyG I think this is a good shot Tim, However if you don't me saying especially as I'm very new to macro/close up photography so certainly don't want to offend in any way. But this doesn't look like a focussing issue to me, it looks more like camera movement.;) I agree with Bryn though the contrast & lighting look just fine to me.(y)

Only my opinion of coarse.,
Click to expand...
Thanks George, and your opinion is very welcome! I don't think you could ever offend me by giving an honest opinion and in fact I fully encourage it!
You know I did originally dismiss the camera movement thing but you may be on to something. More about this shortly...
GardenersHelper said:
If flash is the dominant source of light then the effective shutter speed is the length of the (very brief) flash pulse, which pretty much rules out camera movement issues, even at very high magnification, With Tim's lighting setup, and assuming he used his maximum flash sync shutter speed or close to it, and assuming he wasn't using FP/HSS flash, I imagine flash was the dominant source of light, in which case I doubt the problem would have been down to camera movement.

But there are some ifs and buts in this, so I could be wrong. Well, I could be wrong anyway of course, for entirely different reasons!
Click to expand...
Nick, you are right of course, I usually shoot around 1/200 (which I believe is my max synch speed, or it could be 1/250, I'll need to double check) and I am definitely not shooting with HSS. That said I have been lowering my shutter speed to try to increase the background exposure, but usually no lower that 1/160. I think that should still be enough to freeze the subject however your comments made me think of a couple of things:

I had at some point switch to rear curtain synch for my flash. I can't now remember why I did this, but I'm sure they was a valid reason at the time. I may have read something on another macro photographer's blog about it and thought I would give it a try. Naturally I had forgotten all about this, and it may not be a factor, but equally could be, so I have switched it back to front curtain for the time being.

I do find I am very prone to moving either the shutter speed or aperture by mistake with the camera. It's very small for my big hands, and there is a dial on the rear that can be used to control both these things. My fingers often roll across this by mistake, particularly if I am twisting my camera at some funny angle (which is pretty much all the time). It could be I was shooting at a less than ideal shutter speed purely by accident! I need to go back to the original files to check..

On top of all this, I was holding a leaf up behind this fellow to prevent light fall off (and a black background). Of course this means I was shooting one handed, so this compounded with rear curtain flash synch and perhaps a slower shutter speed may well have resulted in some camera movement. Typically there are a lot of variables that may be involved and I am still getting used to the new gear. It may very well be the case that I need much more practice!

G.K.Jnr. said:
You're perfectly correct Nick in your assumption providing the sole light source was flash. But if there was any ambient light around then that could show up some camera movement. I was just trying to help in sorting the problem out by offering an opinion.

George.
Click to expand...
And help you did! Thanks again

GardenersHelper said:
Quite so, and a good thing too IMO. That's the way we all help one another progress.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

This is probably not a very good example for getting to the crux of the issue, mainly because it's a stack. Slight misalignments of the individual frames could confuse the issue, and of course the end result of all this still has very narrow DoF (it's not a full stack by any means). I think I will need to present some single frames and hopefully that will provide a better base for you to help me analyse further :)
 
TimmyG said:
You know I did originally dismiss the camera movement thing but you may be on to something. More about this shortly......This is probably not a very good example for getting to the crux of the issue, mainly because it's a stack. Slight misalignments of the individual frames could confuse the issue, and of course the end result of all this still has very narrow DoF (it's not a full stack by any means). I think I will need to present some single frames and hopefully that will provide a better base for you to help me analyse further :)
Click to expand...

Ah ha, the ifs and buts kick in. :) Single frames sounds like a good idea.

Two thoughts.

Have you adjusted your processing for images from the new camera?

And I know it's boring, but how about a comparison of the same subject (fabric or carpet fibres, coin or whatever) with both cameras? And then maybe put the RAWs up somewhere? The issue might not be in the capture stage. Just a thought.
 
@GardenersHelper I don't think I've changed how I am processing them at all. I should check to make sure I wasn't using any default settings when I am importing into Lightroom (especially as there are camera specific defaults, and these may work differently for different models). I'm pretty sure I'm not, but definitely worth making sure! I can't think where else I might have changed my processing workflow.

Yes, I'm going to have to do some proper "scientific" tests. I do struggle with these as I'm not the most methodical of people.... I think it will be worth the effort though to expedite the troubleshooting process. Thanks again Nick, your insights are always valuable.
 
TimmyG said:
@GardenersHelper I don't think I've changed how I am processing them at all. I should check to make sure I wasn't using any default settings when I am importing into Lightroom (especially as there are camera specific defaults, and these may work differently for different models). I'm pretty sure I'm not, but definitely worth making sure! I can't think where else I might have changed my processing workflow.
Click to expand...

My thinking was that you may need to change your processing. I have found that I need to take a different approach with RAW images from my 70D, G3 and FZ200, even though two of them are from the same company and you might think their RAW images would handle in the same way. When I restarted with the G3 this time round I was extremely disappointed when I looked at the images. They seemed very soft and lacking in detail. But once I took my time, went back to basics and started processing them thoughtfully, trying various options, rather than processing them by rote using my "standard" techniques, subtleties of detail, texture and tonality started to emerge. Now I have new "standard" settings for my G3 images, and processing is going really quickly and easily.

TimmyG said:
Yes, I'm going to have to do some proper "scientific" tests. I do struggle with these as I'm not the most methodical of people.... I think it will be worth the effort though to expedite the troubleshooting process.
Click to expand...

I'm sure it will.
 
Rear curtain flash now I will need to do some research into that... it would delay the flash to fire on the closing of shutter rather than opening.

Now issue with that would lie if you move from 1st /2nd shutter you could get a little motion blur if ambient light is enough to impact the image. I figure you line up picture so you want to capture it as soon as possible eg first shutter. Yes I know it's milli seconds.

Will try to find out what that suggestion was about.
 
Tintin124 said:
ow issue with that would lie if you move from 1st /2nd shutter you could get a little motion blur if ambient light is enough to impact the image. I figure you line up picture so you want to capture it as soon as possible eg first shutter. Yes I know it's milli seconds.
Click to expand...

But surely the ambient light contribution will be the same whether the flash fires at the beginning or the end - the ambient light is coming in for the same length of time in either case. ??
 
GardenersHelper said:
But surely the ambient light contribution will be the same whether the flash fires at the beginning or the end - the ambient light is coming in for the same length of time in either case. ??
Click to expand...


This is perfectly correct Nick, the only difference that I can see is that with first curtain flash sync any movement due to the ambient light is after the flash has fired.

And with rear curtain flash sync any movement due to the ambient light is before the flash has fired.

If there is no movement in the subject or the camera then as far as I can see both shots would be the same.

(If you are interested there is a shot of mine in the people & portraits section called "Ring Of Fire" and this demonstrates the use of first curtain flash sync and how I did the shot).

George.
 
My point is that you setup for the shot so surely you want the light to hit the sensor as soon as possible?

Hence by delaying it there maybe movement which equates to what you see in the image?

Especially if you are using a rocking motion.
 
Tintin124 said:
My point is that you setup for the shot so surely you want the light to hit the sensor as soon as possible?
Click to expand...

True. Hadn't thought of that.

Tintin124 said:
Hence by delaying it there maybe movement which equates to what you see in the image?
Click to expand...

Not if flash is the dominant light source, in which case I think you get a different (frozen moment in time) image, not an image with movement in it.

Tintin124 said:
Especially if you are using a rocking motion.
Click to expand...

True, if the ambient light contributes a significant proportion of the light on the scene.
 
TimmyG said:
Yes that was my expectation too. Here's the article:

http://nocroppingzone.blogspot.co.uk/2007/05/macro-technique.html

"Camera shake can be a problem when you are shooting with partial flash, but one way to make your images a little sharper is to set your flash to second curtain sync. That way the strongest light to reach the sensor is the last one that went into the lens..."
Click to expand...

Don't think I understand that. Let me try to think this through; sorry if it's a bit slow and pedantic.

We're in the situation where natural light is providing a significant proportion of the illumination, So there will be two components to the final image. There will be an "instantaneous" (1/1000 sec or faster I imagine), component laid down at a particular time during the exposure, towards the beginning of the exposure (soon after the first curtain has finished its traversal) or towards the end of the exposure (shortly before the second curtain starts its traversal). Unless the movement in the scene is extremely fast during the duration of the flash pulse, this component won't show any movement blurring.

The second component will be the sum of the natural light that fell on the sensor during the whole duration of the exposure, from the moment the first curtain started to open to the moment the second curtain finally shut. If there is movement in the scene then this component may well show some movement blurring, depending on how fast the movement is and how long the exposure is.

Let's suppose the flash and natural light components are roughly balanced, and that there is movement in the scene which is fast enough to show up at the given shutter speed, but not fast enough to show up in the duration of the flash pulse. Irrespective of whether first curtain or second curtain flash is being used, there will be a fuzzy, movement-blurred component to the image, and it will be the same in both cases. Superimposed on that will be a "frozen instant" flash component of the image. What it will portray will be either the scene towards the beginning or towards the end of the exposure, but in either case it will have the same "strength" in relation to the other, fuzzy, component in the mix.

So why would the later of those frozen instant image components have a stronger effect on the overall image than the earlier one? Maybe I'm missing something here, but as yet I can't get my head around why this would help make the image sharper.
 
@GardenersHelper Yep, I couldn't figure it out either. "Well.." I thought, "there's one way to find out!" and switched on rear synch. As I've been shooting only very periodically recently I subsequently forgot all about it. I've switched it back for now, to simplify the troubleshooting and I do think @Tintin124 may be onto something, saying it would likely be better to have first curtain synch on.

The only thing I could relate it to is like a painting. If you paint something really strong and bold, and then go over the top of it with say, watered down paint, you will get a foggy sort of result. On the other hand if you paint with watered down paint, then use your bold colours on top, you probably won't see the watered down paint at all. I have no idea if light works in this same way, especially on a single exposure, but I thought it was worth investigating.

I think I need to sort out all my other problems before I do any more experiments like this
G.K.Jnr. said:
(If you are interested there is a shot of mine in the people & portraits section called "Ring Of Fire" and this demonstrates the use of first curtain flash sync and how I did the shot).
Click to expand...

Great portrait George, and good example. I reckon you could do something similar with Front curtain synch (starting at the bottom and moving the arms up) but it obviously makes much more sense this way round!
 
Last edited:
TimmyG said:
@GardenersHelper The only thing I could relate it to is like a painting. If you paint something really strong and bold, and then go over the top of it with say, watered down paint, you will get a foggy sort of result. On the other hand if you paint with watered down paint, then use your bold colours on top, you probably won't see the watered down paint at all.
Click to expand...

I think of it like having two negatives, or transparencies, both underexposed by about the same amount, such that when you add them together it adds up to a properly exposed amount. The effect feels like it must be simply additive to me, with no concept in there of one being applied before or after the other (or put another way, summing the two images feels like an order-independent, commutative operation. as in a + b = b + a.)

There again, I just noticed who wrote that. John Kimbler, one of my very small number of macro heroes. The amazing images he produces, and the amount of work he puts into arranging his setup to get them so, makes me think it is rather more likely that he is right than me!
 
GardenersHelper said:
There again, I just noticed who wrote that. John Kimbler, one of my very small number of macro heroes. The amazing images he produces, and the amount of work he puts into arranging his setup to get them so, makes me think it is rather more likely that he is right than me!
Click to expand...
Yeah there's no arguing with the results he gets. We do have very different philosophies around macro shooting though, specifically around stacking; but any advice he is willing to share I will happily take on board.
 
TimmyG said:
@GardenersHelper
Great portrait George, and good example. I reckon you could do something similar with Front curtain synch (starting at the bottom and moving the arms up) but it obviously makes much more sense this way round!
Click to expand...


That's exactly how it was done Tim, the flash fired when the lad had his arms at the bottom which exposed him, I then kept the shutter open while he moved his arms upwards in an arc and because he was in total darkness only the sparklers were recorded on the film. When his arms reached the top the shutter was closed. It was shot using the bulb shutter setting but in this instance is effectively the same as first/front curtain flash sync.

George.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top