Butterflies - C&C please

[amnd2323]

 

[BekahAura]

I love the shadow in the 1st shot. But I think the 2nd shot is a stronger picture overall. I like how the flowers on either side are both in focus.

 

[ShutterShaman]

Very nice! #2 is definitely the superior composition. Perhaps a tighter crop in the first image.

 

[photonewbie86]

I like number 1 the best the shadow looks awesome

 

[scorpion_tyr]

The shapes in 1 make it a very interesting shot.

2 is really good as well!

I like both, nothing bad to say, or suggest.

 

[Raizels]

I love the second one!

 

[kows]

I love both, but the first one, i would prefer to see more of the butterfly, or from a different angle to get this effect

 

[NateS]

Well, since you asked for c&c...I'll do that instead of an attaboy.

Shots aren't bad, but there are some problems with them to work on.

1. Nothing seems to be overly sharp. I first would have said camera shake but the settings show you shot at something like 1/2000th...so I think maybe it is just a case of misfocused or something. I honestly don't understand why it isn't sharp..but it's not. Other than that it's a fine image, though could use a little crop (though not too heavy).

2. Better focus, but still not as sharp as I would expect an 85mm f1.8 @ f2.8 to be though. It probably has to do with the exposure. This one is overexposed pretty bad and the flower petals are completely blown out and you are starting to lose detail in the outer portions of the butterfly's wings. If you shot raw, it might not be too far gone to recover in pp.

 

[amnd2323]

Thanks for the compliments everyone

Nate....it bothers me too that most of the photos I took that day were not as sharp as I would've liked. I used auto-focus and tried to focus specifically on the eyes. I was as close as my 85mm lens would allow me to get and still focus so I'm thinking maybe even at 2.8, the DOF was still too shallow.

I used Aperature priority and matrix metering so I'm not sure why several of my photos came out so overexposed (I did shoot RAW though, so I can work on PP). I probably should have metered the green and underexposed by 2/3 (like the Peterson book recommends).

Thanks again!

Mandy