Friday Photo: 11 February
February 11th, 2011 at 7:30 am by ChthoniidIt’s into the world of beetles today & that famous gardener’s friend:
Click for larger, higher res image
It’s been a glorious morning watch the sun rise over a very still Hauraki Gulf. Hope you all have a pleasant day too.
February 11th, 2011 at 8:51 am
The important question is why do i keep finding these things on one of my catapults?
Not all of them, just one of them and all the time. Its like a gay bar for bugs or something.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 9:45 am
…a peculiarity of a local wind current perhaps?
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 10:31 am
Possibly, its the one thats against a wall while the others are more exposed.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 10:36 am
I wish there was a “like” button!
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 11:48 am
Program on Animal Planet about a couple in the states who catch ladybugs in a local forest where they gather in the tens of millions. They sale these ladybugs to gardeners all over the states, I think about 250 grams cost 5 $. Anyhow it’s being a good year for them around here, most I have ever seen.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 12:06 pm
Too much wasted scene. That photo would have been far more effective with the background cropped out or zoomed in closer. 60% of it says nothing. Amateurish.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Deep red among the greens.
This is the Keith Locke of the insect world.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 12:31 pm
They can be quite tricky to photograph- their small size and constant movement means small focusing errors or trembles will ruin the shot. I’ve got a 6x microscope adapter on the lens to boost the magnification.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
I think there might be some organic gardening places still in NZ that sell them too. It’s been a good year for them around here too. That and cicadas… stick insects though seem to be a lot sparser.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 12:36 pm
But they don’t provoke any desire to bang my head against a wall in their presence and they serve a useful economic function in human society
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
“Too much wasted scene. That photo would have been far more effective with the background cropped out or zoomed in closer. 60% of it says nothing. Amateurish.”
What are ya? A Communist or something?
Chthoniid, your photos are great and thanks! But, obviously, I don’t know much about photography and neither, it seems, do you. Every week that well-known expert on everything, Master Baiter, has to tell you where you went wrong.
Have you thought of submitting them for his approval before posting here?
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 1:30 pm
@DavidR
I said all I needed to say to the ‘baiter in October last year.
Vote:He has made it obvious he knows very little about photography. I cannot see any point pursuing the matter here.
February 11th, 2011 at 2:31 pm
Actually, depth of field is pretty shallow too. Seems to be something you can never quite come to grips with. Keep practicing and keep trying. You will improve.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
Quoted for dumbfuck comment. It’s a beetle what 3, maybe 4mm wide? It’s not a steam locomotive or a public building.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 2:56 pm
That is the challenge of macro photography.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 3:01 pm
@RRM
With the aperture closed down to f19 the actual physical depth of field that can be achieved is 1-2mm deep. Going all the way to f32 would get you about 1 more mm of DOF but the consequent defraction would of course, noticeably reduce the detail. Having a focal plane that is a mere 1-2mm deep to place on the subject presents the technical challenge to macro photography.
The advantage is that this defocuses the background into a smooth, bokeh-pleasing look.
Anyone with a basic knowledge of photography would naturally, be familiar with the basics of DOF calculations.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 3:08 pm
“the consequent defraction would of course, noticeably reduce the detail.”
Rubbish.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 3:15 pm
Great photo Chthoniid
Thanks
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 4:25 pm
Thanks @Pentwig – it’s always more of a challenge trying to photography the truly smaller creatures.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
Have you tried high end compacts for macro Chthoniid?
I have had some excellent results with the Panasonic LX5 and also the Pansonic FZ35 on tele macro. Macro is about the only time these cams will rival a DSLR.
Vote:February 11th, 2011 at 9:13 pm
@Shunda Barunda
I’m afraid not- the problem with compacts in the end is their small physical sensors. This means they’re liable to much more noise, and need both stronger AA filters and noise-reducing algorithims to counter this. (This problem gets worse as manufacturers squeeze more pixels on to the sensor). All of this reduces the detail you can end up with. One of the reasons I stayed with my Minolta system after the Sony takeover was Sony’s decision to use weaker AA filters on their cameras (this translates into slightly more detail if you’re shooting at a low ISO)
I’ve been keeping an eye though on the developments with EVIL cameras (that’s Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lenses) like the Olympus Pen or the Sony NEX. Neither have the manual controls I’m after, but they use much larger sensors (4/3 or APS-C) with concomitant increases in image quality. The lack of mirror reduces the size of the camera and makes video functions easier. There’s often occasions when a smaller camera is far more convenient.
Vote: