The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
I wasn’t sure this moment would arrive in Bozeman this year! I’ve been looking in the usual places for wildflowers for a couple of weeks but hadn’t found one until today! There, in the shelter of a towering Douglas Fir Tree, was the object of today’s hunt. Working its way through the dead and decaying remains of last years verdant life, a Sagebrush Buttercup shows off its new blossom. The hope of more flowers is evident in the buds forming below the opened one. I’ll be keeping my eyes out for the Pasque Flowers too. My wife found one partially opened one, and we found a lot of plants with unopened buds, so things should really start popping with the warm weather this week!
Specific Feedback
The front corners are a little soft. I had enough images to stack that would include this area, but I sort of like the depth it adds. Is it too distracting though?
Technical Details
Nikon D850
Sigma 105 Macro f/2.8
ISO 64, f/8, 1/160th
20 images stacked in Helicon Focus
Hi. Cool photo !!! I would brighten up the subjects some so they pop out. Great lines and texture in the pine cone ??? looks like you vignette the photo which i really like. maybe dodge the subject or brighten with the contrast filter. just my thought on a really nice photo…
Nice image, Paul, I don’t mind any softness on the corners, not sure I see too much anyway; but the shadowy vignette on the corners darkens an already dark image. Aesthetically, the Pine cone balances the flowers nicely and provides a great sense of place; but technically I would want to see an increase in exposure on the flower and basal leaves maybe the dark areas of the cone to balance it off.
I am new to flower photography, and I have to ask about the 20 images stacked. Like how long did it take you to make 20 images with the different focal points ? And did you use a different location for all the petals and all the leaves of the Buttercup, the cone and ground litter? At f8 do you get less than inch of focal distance? The subjects are very sharp and is what attracts me to the image.
Oh do I know what you mean, Paul! We finally have some hepatica and bloodroot coming up and then we got some snow the other day on top of them. All the joys of living (slightly) above the 45th parallel.
I really like your little buttercup. Funny how so many species in this group are immediately recognizable even if we don’t know the exact species. These flowers look almost exactly like Marsh marigold which should be up here in a about a month. The cone texture contrasts so well, as do the colors. The exposure seems really off though - even with my screen on its brightest setting it seems too dim. If it were brighter I could look at the stack to see how you did, but I just can’t tell right now.
Thanks for this lovely window into spring. Maybe in the next few days as it gets into the 60s I can get back out for more!
Oh and hey, @Stephen_Stanton - I will let Paul answer about exactly what he did here, but if you’d like more info about stacking, check out the discussion here on NPN -
Lots of folks contributing ideas and techniques on this topic.
Lovely subjects and juxtaposition! Fir cones are so interesting with their little snake tongues. Hoping to see more signs of spring up there!
I think the image could profit from an exposure bump – the histogram is all in the left half. Even for something in deep shade, our eyes correct in real life but not so much when viewing an image.
Macro photography is a strange thing! The depth of field at a given aperture changes depending on the proximity to the subject. I was probably 12" from the subject here and I’m guessing my depth of field was about 1/4", even at f/8! When just a few inches away, the depth is 1/16 or so! I use the “focus shift” feature on my Nikon D850. It automatically moves the focus point out for each exposure. I took 50 shots but just needed 20 to get what I wanted in focus. I use software called Helicon Focus to merge the images.
@Kris_Smith@Diane_Miller@Stephen_Stanton@Gill_Vanderlip I’ve been experimenting with darker, less saturated images than I have done in the past. I do agree though that this came out too dark! I’ve added a re-worked image. I like it much better. Thanks for the input!
The RP really brings out the subjects, with lovely lighting!
@Stephen_Stanton, you can do an internet search for depth of field calculators and enter example numbers and get a pretty accurate idea of the DOF for your macro setup. The equation is complex and a big factor is what they assume for the circle of confusion, which is basically the degree of sharpness you want. With today’s high-res sensors, the old commonly-accepted value from the days of film and lower-quality lenses gives too large a DOF. I don’t know if the accepted value has changed, but I’d take the calculated depths as being on the optimistic side. I think Paul’s guess for this image was about right.
Paul, the second post looks great…like the sunlight broke through and hit the buttercup and top of the cone. Nicely done. And thanks for the input on the in camera “focus shift”. Foolish me thinking I 'd need to have the patience of a saint to manually shift the focal points.
@Kris_Smith thanks for pointing out the info available on the subject via the posts. I 'll be checking your blog And @Diane_Miller, Thanks for your input on depth of field calculators. I use hyper-focal charts for most of my landscape stuff, and have measured out with a ruler various distances and f stops for my 85mm macro. But i can see that I might need a new set up for macro work.
