lady bug

[Woolsocks]

open to c and c. Thanks.

 

[snowbear]

Please complete your C&C post:

1) After you post your photo, please provide as much technical detail as you have. Your camera, your lens, even shutter speed and aperture, plus whatever editing program used. For our analog users, include your film type and development process.

2) In a sentence or two, please let us know what you were trying to achieve with your shot. Letting us know why you took the shot helps us understand your creative thought process, which will inform how someone might respond.

 

[Woolsocks]

Please complete your C&C post:

1) After you post your photo, please provide as much technical detail as you have. Your camera, your lens, even shutter speed and aperture, plus whatever editing program used. For our analog users, include your film type and development process.

2) In a sentence or two, please let us know what you were trying to achieve with your shot. Letting us know why you took the shot helps us understand your creative thought process, which will inform how someone might respond.

Center weighted metering. 4mm focal length. 1/1000th of a second. f 1.5 ..

Edited in Photoshop. Grayscale conversion. 1 image of one lady bug cloned to other spots onto the grass stalk.
edit>transform. clone out shadows.

Is this photo over the top? Maybe overly sharpened. Maybe not clear enough.

 

[smoke665]

Is this photo over the top? Maybe overly sharpened. Maybe not clear enough

I guess the answer to that depends on your vision for the final image. Did you succeed with what "you" wanted to accomplish? To me it's somewhat reminiscent of a film negative.

 

[Thiophilos]

Hi, Woolsocks. I will make some comments.

Your photo is an experiment, yes? I think you were trying a technique and making an image to see how it would look.

The forum rules require that you declare "what you were trying to achieve with your shot". That is cool, it is relevant, but photography is a communications medium. So let me turn the question around - what were you expecting the viewers to get out of your shot? What are you intending to communicate?

Communication through an image does not have to be any deep thing. It could just be a feeling. But IMO you should be communicating something.

Here's what I see. I see a surreal image. It is in BW which is unnatural for a natural subject. And the lighting is unnatural (or it is a negative). There are four bugs, and they appear to be the main subject. They are scattered around but not in an identifiable pattern. The photo seems to be a kind of design or a test.

I don't see anything really compelling about the pic. I am not going to feel an urge to come back and view the image again, or to show it to others. The subject is not that interesting. Maybe this is what is called "subject failure". A good picture needs a good subject.

It is good to experiment, though! Maybe there are other things you can do with the technique.

 

[Woolsocks]

Hi, Woolsocks. I will make some comments.

Your photo is an experiment, yes? I think you were trying a technique and making an image to see how it would look.

The forum rules require that you declare "what you were trying to achieve with your shot". That is cool, it is relevant, but photography is a communications medium. So let me turn the question around - what were you expecting the viewers to get out of your shot? What are you intending to communicate?

Communication through an image does not have to be any deep thing. It could just be a feeling. But IMO you should be communicating something.

Here's what I see. I see a surreal image. It is in BW which is unnatural for a natural subject. And the lighting is unnatural (or it is a negative). There are four bugs, and they appear to be the main subject. They are scattered around but not in an identifiable pattern. The photo seems to be a kind of design or a test.

I don't see anything really compelling about the pic. I am not going to feel an urge to come back and view the image again, or to show it to others. The subject is not that interesting. Maybe this is what is called "subject failure". A good picture needs a good subject.

It is good to experiment, though! Maybe there are other things you can do with the technique.

Yup that's what I thought to. A test if it was feasible.

I had not posted in this section and wanted to contribute something. But as my skill is only inhibited by my equipment and editing.

Thank you Thiophilos and smoke665.

​

 

[smoke665]

I had not posted in this section and wanted to contribute something. But as my skill is only inhibited by my equipment and editing

The C&C Gallery was created as a sounding board where members could go for critical feedback and suggestions on their images. All members of any skill level are welcome.

I would strongly disagree that "skill" is ever limited by equipment or processing. Merriam-Webster defines skill as "the ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance." I've seen outstanding images from nothing more than a pinhole camera to cameras costing $$$$$. Check out the Alternative Techniques & Photo Gallery , skill is a subset of knowledge you use to create something.

 

[Woolsocks]

The C&C Gallery was created as a sounding board where members could go for critical feedback and suggestions on their images. All members of any skill level are welcome.

I would strongly disagree that "skill" is ever limited by equipment or processing. Merriam-Webster defines skill as "the ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance." I've seen outstanding images from nothing more than a pinhole camera to cameras costing $$$$$. Check out the Alternative Techniques & Photo Gallery , skill is a subset of knowledge you use to create something.

Salt. Water. Pasta. Pot. Heat source.

Phone camera. Photoshop.

I agree creativity isn't limited by equipment or skill. That's not in the same category I am talking about.

And I book marked your link. I didn't see that. Thank you.

 

[AlanKlein]

I always wondered. What is a male Lady Bug called?

 

[Woolsocks]

I always wondered. What is a male Lady Bug called?

When they mate.............. Males are on top....

 

[Thiophilos]

I always wondered. What is a male Lady Bug called?

I guess it would be a gentleman bug.

The Lady part of Ladybug refers to Mary, mother of Jesus. The ladybug is regarded as a sacred kind of beetle. In German, it is called the Marienkäfer, literally Mary's beetle. Sometimes they say Frauenkäfer (= lady beetle) or Muttergotteskäfer (mother of God beetle). In Dutch, it is lieveheersbeestje, which means Dear Lord Bug ("little beast"). In French, it is bête à bon Dieu, Good God's beast. We have a gender change, but the religious connection remains.

Some say it's the seven spots on some ladybugs that connected it to Mary, but I doubt it because the bug was named after goddess Freya before Christianization.

So for a male ladybug, it's best to just call it a male ladybug/ladybird.