How am I doing?

[RKRAMOS]

C&C Please!

 

[Drake]

I love your ladybug shots, especially the first one. The flowers are kind of underexposed.

 

[bazooka]

You've posted quite a few for detailed C&C but they're similar enough to kind of group them together... but please number them.

#1 Soft and overexposed. Quite a catch if he's in flight, but it unfortunately shows the ugly side of the ladybug. No exif data in the photo so I don't know if the shutter speed is the reason for the softness or if it's just out of focus.

#2 Overexposed and the dof is too narrow to capture the entire bug. Use a smaller aperture to increase the dof. Also, your hand holding the branch in the background is a distraction, mostly because of it's color breaking up the otherwise pleasing pallette you have and causing it to stand out like a.... well, a sore thumb. Not to mention it's your hand in the shot.

#3 This one maybe a little underexposed but not too bad. The colors are more saturated and you have an angle of the bug that shows off it's color and pattern well. Still, the dof is too shallow to capture it in focus. And I can see what is probably your hand in the corner holding the stem.

#4 This is the best of the bunch for me... it's well exposed, your hand isn't visible, the colors are rich, the bug is sharper than the other attempts, although it's still a bit soft on the nose, which is more important than toward the back in this shot. It's best to get the head in focus and let the rest fall where it may if you've already optimized your dof.

The flower shots are underexposed and imo not interesting. The 2nd of the 3 is the best composed.

 

[RKRAMOS]

I love your ladybug shots, especially the first one. The flowers are kind of underexposed.

Thank you!

 

[RKRAMOS]

You've posted quite a few for detailed C&C but they're similar enough to kind of group them together... but please number them.

#1 Soft and overexposed. Quite a catch if he's in flight, but it unfortunately shows the ugly side of the ladybug. No exif data in the photo so I don't know if the shutter speed is the reason for the softness or if it's just out of focus.

#2 Overexposed and the dof is too narrow to capture the entire bug. Use a smaller aperture to increase the dof. Also, your hand holding the branch in the background is a distraction, mostly because of it's color breaking up the otherwise pleasing pallette you have and causing it to stand out like a.... well, a sore thumb. Not to mention it's your hand in the shot.

#3 This one maybe a little underexposed but not too bad. The colors are more saturated and you have an angle of the bug that shows off it's color and pattern well. Still, the dof is too shallow to capture it in focus. And I can see what is probably your hand in the corner holding the stem.

#4 This is the best of the bunch for me... it's well exposed, your hand isn't visible, the colors are rich, the bug is sharper than the other attempts, although it's still a bit soft on the nose, which is more important than toward the back in this shot. It's best to get the head in focus and let the rest fall where it may if you've already optimized your dof.

The flower shots are underexposed and imo not interesting. The 2nd of the 3 is the best composed.

Thanks, I'll start labeling them from now on. I really wish I had a proper lens for this type of photography.

As for your comment on number 1, he had just taken off the blade of grass, I was trying to get closer but I guess he got scared and took off. I think that might be the reason for it being a tad bit out of focus

#2 understandable and noted. Thanks.

#3 :blushing: Yea, that's my hand, I was trying to move the plant without disturbing the lady bug but couldn't angle myself in a position to get the lady bug and not step in an ant hill.

#4 So adjusting the aperture will allow for a sharper focus on my subject?

As for the flower shots they were there and I said those look cool.

 

[jrice12]

Think bazooka did a good job of it. I would only add that, except the 3rd shot, all of beetles seem small for the frame. Only the last of the flower shots have interest with some depth to it but here there is too much space on the left for no purpose - the orientation of the flower would probably favor a vertical crop. The first flower shot starts at the center bottom and rockets off to the right and off stage leaving lots of space on left (I perfer position in second flower shot). On second flower shot I might have tried to get some of the flower anthers against the background to add interest etc.

 

[RKRAMOS]

Think bazooka did a good job of it. I would only add that, except the 3rd shot, all of beetles seem small for the frame. Only the last of the flower shots have interest with some depth to it but here there is too much space on the left for no purpose - the orientation of the flower would probably favor a vertical crop. The first flower shot starts at the center bottom and rockets off to the right and off stage leaving lots of space on left (I perfer position in second flower shot). On second flower shot I might have tried to get some of the flower anthers against the background to add interest etc.

Thanks, I'll definitely try this next time.

 

[dericcainphoto]

Like bazooka said, I believe you could sacrifice a little depth of field in order to get a sharper image. I have a few lenses that will open up to f/1.8 and below, but I do sacrifice some sharpness for doing so. If I stop them down a half stop or so, I notice a great difference. One day I will have a few $2000 lenses that will maintain sharp focus at all apertures. Until then... I will stop down. Great shots though! Keep it up!

 

[RKRAMOS]

Haha I don't know about $2000 that's WAY out of my price range at the moment, but I think actually having a specific lens made for macro photography would help me out a lot.