Chasing C&C - Commercial-ish Macro Shots

Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.

Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent.

Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature.

Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread.

Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

Chasing C&C - Commercial-ish Macro Shots

Postby Ronza on Sat Sep 30, 2006 4:07 am

Received the MP-E 65mm last fornight, bit annoyed I haven't had the opportunity to seriously use it yet until now. Had a light tent setup to do some quick shots for a lens I'm selling so threw some other stuff in there and had a play with lighting tonight. No particular purpose for the shots other than to get used to the lens a lil' more but nevertheless, wouldn't mind general C&C with specific relation on whether the lighting works or not. Especially that iPod shot.

Image
#1 - Canon EOS20D MP-E 65mm & 550EX Off Shoe ISO400 f/16 1/250s

Image
#2 - Canon EOS20D MP-E 65mm & 550EX Off Shoe ISO400 f/10 1/250s

Image
#3 - Canon EOS20D MP-E 65mm & 550EX Off Shoe ISO800 f/8 1/250s

Image
#4 - Canon EOS20D MP-E 65mm & 550EX Off Shoe ISO400 f/16 1/250s
User avatar
Ronza
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:55 pm
Location: West Lakes, Adelaide

Postby gstark on Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:02 am

Good work.

But, I think you need to add more light, so that you can use a higher aperture and get greater DoF in these.

Each of the first three look to me as if the DoF is too shallow for the subject.

For instance, I would like to see pretty much the whole of the grille on the earbud ti be crisp, likewise, probably the whole of the IC in #2. In that image, it's really not clear to me if the IC or its connections are the subject, though, and thus it either needs greater DoF (IC) or less (connections) to help focus the viewer's attention on the point that your image is trying to make.

The third one - it's almost there ... but I think that the "C" on the "DC" sections needs to be in focus. What I'm seeing is that there are a number of components that are being described in this lens's badging, and an image such as this would either highlight all of them, or it would highlight just one by isolating it, and the rest would be OOF. In this case, I would look to throw the focus a millimeter back towards the right, actiually) so that that whole of the "DC" was in clear focus (you curently have the 6 plus the space, plus the D as your focus plane. Also the 10, actually - there's a band running diagonally across the image that shows your focus plane.

What you're attempting to do here could actually benefit from the use of a PC lens, btw, but that's another couple of thousand dollars. :)

The easiest way out is to dial up the light, and dial in more DoF.

:)
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22924
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby MHD on Sat Sep 30, 2006 4:25 pm

I agree with gary on all but the first image... I like the first image as it is dynamic and the shallow DOF works with that...

As for the rest they are nice shots, but if you say they are commerical (against artistic) there is one thing I have learnt and that is that stock companies (the people most likely interested in these shots) do not like shallow DOF..
New page
http://www.potofgrass.com
Portfolio...
http://images.potofgrass.com
Comments and money always welcome
User avatar
MHD
Moderator
 
Posts: 5829
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 8:51 pm
Location: Chicago Burbs


Return to Image Reviews and Critiques

cron