Spider and a Bee

Nostromo

Nostromo

Messages
5,919
Name
Dominic
Edit My Images
Yes
Even though there was only the slightest hint of a breeze, the spider and web just kept on moving. It took a fair few shoots to get something remotely in focus.
The second spider shot (same spider and web) i like because it is almost translucent, but isn't fully in focus (not enough dof).
The Bee just would not move into a better position, so i got what i could.
This is all practice for me, who's just getting into macro and close up photography.

untitled-48 by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

untitled-41 by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr


untitled-53 by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr
 
Nice set Dominic first is the best
 
Looks to me like it is going well. I very much like the first one.

Nostromo said:
Even though there was only the slightest hint of a breeze, the spider and web just kept on moving. It took a fair few shoots to get something remotely in focus.
The second spider shot (same spider and web) i like because it is almost translucent, but isn't fully in focus (not enough dof).
Click to expand...

Yes, you need to find your own preferred balance of aperture/DoF and ISO/Shutter speed of course. FWIW I would typically use f/22 with my Canon 70D for shots like that and have the ISO at 800 or so. Mind you, that was with close-up lenses where the effective aperture is the same as the nominal aperture that you set on the camera/lens. Presumably that is a 150 macro you are using, so effective aperture decreases as magnification increases. If you were at 1:1 for the spider shots then the effective apertures would have been f/32 for the first shot and f/18 for the second. I'd be comfortable with f/32, but to get the best out of it that may mean using some more aggressive post processing to offset (some of) the effects of diffraction.

My apologies if you know all this already. :)
 
GardenersHelper said:
My apologies if you know all this already. :)
Click to expand...
No apologies needed. I've not long had a macro lens and went for the 150mm simply because it was quite cheap (used) and for the working distance. I've never really understood the effective aperture thing. I'm more of a learn and remember, what does and doesn't work kind of person. Somehow these things stick in my head more than the technical theory, if that makes sense :)
 
Nostromo said:
No apologies needed. I've not long had a macro lens and went for the 150mm simply because it was quite cheap (used) and for the working distance. I've never really understood the effective aperture thing. I'm more of a learn and remember, what does and doesn't work kind of person. Somehow these things stick in my head more than the technical theory, if that makes sense :)
Click to expand...

Yes, it makes perfect sense. It took me quite a while (years, I'm a slow learner) to grasp some essentials that turned out to matter for me. For the rest of the theory - it goes straight over my head. :)
 
Nice you might want to try a faster shutter speed to get them sharper. 1/40 is quite slow unless you have a tripod and it is windless.
 
davholla said:
Nice you might want to try a faster shutter speed to get them sharper. 1/40 is quite slow unless you have a tripod and it is windless.
Click to expand...
I was using a tripod, I wanted to keep the same composition for all of the attempts of getting a photo in focus. When I realised that that wasn't going to work, I then added ocf to try and freeze the spider and Web. I kept the slow-ish shutter speed and upped the iso because I didn't want a completely black background, the first shot is the result :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top