What’s Your Preference?

RangerGuy · #1 (**permalink**) 08-14-2007, 03:25 PM

A quick hand-held macro shot of a ladybug on a flower stem in the garden. I'm wondering of the blur towards the back of the body is due to it being a hand-held shot? The front seems to be in decent focus. Am I being too picky? I find myself taking a lot of Macro shots, though I'm unhappy with most of them - usually because of a focus-type issue.

brianfarrell · #2 (**permalink**) 08-14-2007, 03:52 PM

It's not a hand-held issue - if it was motion blur due to hand-holding, then the entire picture would be blurred.

This is purely and simply depth of field. In my opinion - for what that's worth - you've done a pretty good job here.

These bug shots follow the same rule as any portrait - get the eyes in focus. I'm not too sure exactly where this critter's eyes are, but you seem to have got pretty close

Forgive me if I'm teaching you to suck eggs here, but to increase the depth of field you need to use a smaller aperture. Of course, that means that your shutter speed has to go down too and then you get into hand-held blur problems... (Who told you this would be easy?) or use a tripod by which time the thing has probably flown away...or increase the ISO number and also the noise in your pic... ah well... that's life - it's always one trade-off against another!

RangerGuy · #3 (**permalink**) 08-14-2007, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianfarrell

It's not a hand-held issue - if it was motion blur due to hand-holding, then the entire picture would be blurred.

This is purely and simply depth of field. In my opinion - for what that's worth - you've done a pretty good job here.

These bug shots follow the same rule as any portrait - get the eyes in focus. I'm not too sure exactly where this critter's eyes are, but you seem to have got pretty close

Forgive me if I'm teaching you to suck eggs here, but to increase the depth of field you need to use a smaller aperture. Of course, that means that your shutter speed has to go down too and then you get into hand-held blur problems... (Who told you this would be easy?) or use a tripod by which time the thing has probably flown away...or increase the ISO number and also the noise in your pic... ah well... that's life - it's always one trade-off against another!

Thanks for your input. I'm finding that there are so many "rules" and "guidelines" in photography that I get overwhelmed if I put too much thought all at once into getting a photo. I've been working on mostly composition and lighting in my photos, and not focusing too much on all the other things. I figure that once I get more comfortable with the composition and lighting, I'll be better able to concentrate on the "smaller" things.

I don't use my tripod nearly as much as I should - mostly because I'll sneak 5 minutes of taking snapshots here and there during the week. Having two kids takes up all the "hobby time".

wulf · #4 (**permalink**) 08-14-2007, 05:13 PM

Get the hang of it gradually - after all, if you could master it today, what would be the point of carrying on tomorrow?

As Brian says, the "problem" is that you have a wide aperture (f/2.8 according to the EXIF data shown on the Flickr page - smaller numbers mean a wider aperture), which gives you a relatively narrow depth of field. That is exacerbated when you are very close to your subject (which, being macro photography, is inevitable!).

I don't know what range of control you have on your camera but if you can dial in a smaller aperture you are more likely to get the whole bug in focus. Having said that, I don't think that is a big problem - it is a common characteristic of macro photography and you have the right bit in focus, enough to clearly show the texture. If there is one weakness of the picture, it is that a bit more light on the bugs face would be good as the dark colour makes it hard to read.

However, overall, an excellent shot.

Wulf

RangerGuy · #5 (**permalink**) 08-14-2007, 07:54 PM

Thanks. I'm not sure if I can use macro mode in Aperature Priority mode on my camera. Something I'll have to look into.

Thanks a lot

PLouie · #6 (**permalink**) 08-14-2007, 08:40 PM

I wouldn't worry about the blur in this particular shot. If anything, it actually helps us focus more on the part that matters--the head. Like a previous poster said, it is like a portrait and there are certainly portraits that have small depth of field. In macro shots they are almost inevitable so I think the shot is fine and quite a good one at that. Good Job.