Two for C&C regarding composition

OrionsByte · Jan 20, 2011

I've been really trying to work on my composition - I think these two are better than what I presented last week, but I'd appreciate any thoughts on these.

1. Lunchbox

I took several shots at this and originally I was shooting it so that the top of the lunchbox was level across the top of the frame, but ended up liking this one better, with the edge of the lid level instead. I had the ISO set to 1600 because I was intending it to be just a test shot and I was just shooting in ambient light at the office. I was going to set up some lighting when I got home and shoot it "for real," but I decided I kind of liked the noise, especially in B&W. A friend of mine recommended adding a slight vignette, and it really pulled the image together.

2. Scissors

I made several attempts at this too. Initially I used blank white paper instead of newspaper, but realized that the paper really needed something printed on it to bring some texture to the image. I cut (and curled) the paper to add some interest to that corner and to try to keep the lines of the scissors from drawing the eye out of the frame - does it accomplish that?

BuS_RiDeR · Jan 20, 2011

I like the first one... Nice composition.

THe secong doesn't appeal to me...

white · Jan 20, 2011

So the lock is supposed to be the subject, but I find that the subject is not very interesting because the bottom portion is nearly hidden in shadow, and the light is not very interesting overall.

I figured out something far too late: light can make anything look good. Photos can be cropped into good compositions, but if your light sucks, you're screwed.

The other thing is I think you'll have an easier (and more enjoyable) time looking for comps. in the world outside your house.

Scissors are only so interesting.

Bitter Jeweler · Jan 20, 2011

Narrow DoF gets boring.

OrionsByte · Jan 20, 2011

white said:
So the lock is supposed to be the subject, but I find that the subject is not very interesting because the bottom portion is nearly hidden in shadow, and the light is not very interesting overall.

I figured out something far too late: light can make anything look good. Photos can be cropped into good compositions, but if your light sucks, you're screwed.

Yeah I see what you're saying; I probably should have gone with my gut and waited until I got home so I could set up some controlled lighting.

white said:
The other thing is I think you'll have an easier (and more enjoyable) time looking for comps. in the world outside your house.

Scissors are only so interesting.

I'm doing weekly themes and this week is "macro" so yeah I haven't ventured outside much. Obviously these aren't true macros but I don't have the equipment for it. I'll try to get outside at least a couple times in the next few days though, it's good advice.

BuS_RiDeR and Bitter, thanks for your comments as well. For what it's worth, I agree with Bitter that shallow DOF gets old, but with "macro-ish" shots this week I'm not sure I can get around that. Not to say that I can't toss the theme idea out and go shoot something else, but all in due time.

I probably sound like I'm making excuses; I'm not trying to. I really appreciate the input. Before I posted these I asked myself if I was ready for them to get torn up, and I was. I still am. Keep the comments comin'.

Overread · Jan 20, 2011

If you don't have flash (with some modification most popup flashes can do decently well for macro lighting even up to 1:1 true macro) you can always use a support/tripod + timer/remote release to use longer exposures. That would let you close your aperture down for more depth of field in the shots instead of being limited to tiny depths of field (esp since your subjects aren't going anywhere anytime soon

).

You can also play with the depth of field to get the maximum result for the small area covered by it.

jeeptuff · Jan 20, 2011

I really like the second one, it's captivating.

OrionsByte · Jan 20, 2011

Overread said:
If you don't have flash (with some modification most popup flashes can do decently well for macro lighting even up to 1:1 true macro) you can always use a support/tripod + timer/remote release to use longer exposures. That would let you close your aperture down for more depth of field in the shots instead of being limited to tiny depths of field (esp since your subjects aren't going anywhere anytime soon ).

You can also play with the depth of field to get the maximum result for the small area covered by it.

I have a flash - the scissor shot was shot with a bare SB-600 behind and to the right of the camera, with a foamboard reflector just out of frame to the right. It took some trial and error to get the steel to reflect just the way I wanted it to.

I get your point though, and I guess I never really did the math. Typically when I'm using a shoot-through umbrella, if the flash is about 4 feet from my subject, and if I'm shooting at f/8, I find that 1/4 power on the flash is sufficient. If I'm shooting macro, I can obviously get the umbrella closer; there's two stops. I can crank up the flash to full if I have to, there's two stops. That would take me from f/5.6 all the way to f/22, and if I needed more I could always bring up the ISO.

So I guess I just had this idea in my head that close-up/macro shots meant short DOF and I didn't bother trying to do anything about it. Silly head.

Overread · Jan 20, 2011

Be careful how low you set the aperture - generally speaking after around f13 things start to get noticeably softer though f16 should still be usable - anything after and you're really going to see the results soften.