Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Fungi...?  (Read 4666 times)
MR.FEESH
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 132



WWW
« on: May 14, 2009, 05:12:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Don't know what this is.
Any-hoo, I like it.
Any suggestions on color or cropping? (...etc)



Elby
Logged

Sigma SD14 w/ PG-21
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX Macro
Sigma 70mm F2.8 DG EX Macro
pete_truman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 116


WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 14, 2009, 05:30:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't know what it is, but it reminds me of the number of times I've taken macro shots only to be surprised at the number of spider web filaments, dust and other imperfections that I didn't see when I took the photographs!

I like the shot, and it makes me wonder what else is further down the branch...
Logged

Pete Truman
PeterAit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1795



WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 14, 2009, 05:43:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MR.FEESH
Don't know what this is.
Any-hoo, I like it.
Any suggestions on color or cropping? (...etc)



Elby


Lovely! Unfortunately, the lower-left fungus is cropped at the left, and tha is a real sore point for me. But, otherwise terrific.

When I go mushroom hunting, I usually have the frying pan and not the camera in mind!
Logged

Peter
"Photographic technique is a means to an end, never the end itself."
View my photos at http://www.peteraitken.com
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #3 on: May 14, 2009, 10:17:21 PM »
ReplyReply

With a little cloning, you could make the bottom mushroom look like it's totally in the frame. Then you could reduce the extent of or eliminate that thing above the bottom mushroom, which breaks up the rather good flow of the mushrooms going up the branch.

Here's my crude example of the clone.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2009, 10:26:27 PM by dalethorn » Logged
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5698



WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2009, 12:53:37 AM »
ReplyReply

This is loosely called a polypore, or a flat timber fungus.  I don't know the species, though.

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
MR.FEESH
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 132



WWW
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2009, 11:34:39 AM »
ReplyReply

 
How'd you do that!!?!
Pretty neat stuff.  Yes, I agree that the one portion going out of the picture does subtract from it.
Thanks for the ID Mike!  I feel like it's the quintessential photography fungus.
Thanks for the nice/helpful words guys!

Elby
Logged

Sigma SD14 w/ PG-21
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX Macro
Sigma 70mm F2.8 DG EX Macro
situgrrl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 342


WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 16, 2009, 12:17:37 PM »
ReplyReply

This version I increased local contrast (Clarity slider in LR) and lightened the yellow channel to counteract some of the luminosity.  I think this could be done with the channel splitter in LR but I used PS HSL layer.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2009, 12:18:18 PM by situgrrl » Logged

dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2009, 03:17:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MR.FEESH
How'd you do that!!?!

If you're asking about the clone, it just takes a lot of practice, so your fingers can move quickly while changing the brush size quite a few times to get around the tight spots.
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6079



WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2009, 06:43:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MR.FEESH
Don't know what this is.
Any-hoo, I like it.
Any suggestions on color or cropping? (...etc)
Elby

Elby, Yes, a re-shoot would be in order. You need considerably more depth of field for this kind of thing. It might be okay to let the farthest out mushroom slip out of focus, but as you've shot it, only the second mushroom and a very small part of the tree (log?) are in focus. Again, this isn't exactly street photography. You probably can do it over and improve it.
Logged

MR.FEESH
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 132



WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2009, 07:19:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: situgrrl
This version I increased local contrast (Clarity slider in LR) and lightened the yellow channel to counteract some of the luminosity.  I think this could be done with the channel splitter in LR but I used PS HSL layer.

Wow- this, I like.  I'll def play around with that, thanks.

Quote from: dalethorn
If you're asking about the clone, it just takes a lot of practice, so your fingers can move quickly while changing the brush size quite a few times to get around the tight spots.


Geez.  Bravo!

Quote from: RSL
Elby, Yes, a re-shoot would be in order. You need considerably more depth of field for this kind of thing. It might be okay to let the farthest out mushroom slip out of focus, but as you've shot it, only the second mushroom and a very small part of the tree (log?) are in focus. Again, this isn't exactly street photography. You probably can do it over and improve it.


I'm have a < $100 p&s.  I have no control of DOF.  I took this picture while on a hike in another state, no chance of ever getting this again.  Thanks though.
I'm willing to take DSLR donations, if you're feeling magnanimous.
Logged

Sigma SD14 w/ PG-21
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX Macro
Sigma 70mm F2.8 DG EX Macro
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2009, 08:11:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MR.FEESH
I'm have a < $100 p&s.  I have no control of DOF.  I took this picture while on a hike in another state, no chance of ever getting this again.  Thanks though.
I'm willing to take DSLR donations, if you're feeling magnanimous.

You'd be extremely disappointed if you invested a thousand or two in a DSLR and then found it didn't do some magic to improve your photos. There are specific things the DSLR's do, but more typically they provide *less* DOF on shots like this, not more. Your P&S is a better bet for DOF - you just have to recognize what the factors are - probably just more light. Try setting the flash to forced on, or always on, too add some fill light.

When you do invest some more cash in a newer/bigger camera, you'll get more and better pixels, more controls, etc., but you still have to do the work.
Logged
MR.FEESH
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 132



WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 16, 2009, 10:19:59 PM »
ReplyReply

I was referring to the comment in that it was suggested I change the DOF, a setting which my camera doesn't have whereas I know you have some more options as to what's in focus by changing the aperture (given the right conditions yaduhyaduhyaduh)-- I'm quite aware and have heard many times that it's the person behind the camera that makes the difference, not the instrument itself.  I've been doing my studying and know what to expect when my saving finally amounts to the camera I have in mind.  I like your suggestion with the flash.  I've been experimenting putting tissues/tissue paper over the flash to help in situations that require a little manipulation-- the bare flash tends to ruin the sh*t out of most things ahah.
Logged

Sigma SD14 w/ PG-21
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX Macro
Sigma 70mm F2.8 DG EX Macro
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #12 on: May 16, 2009, 11:07:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MR.FEESH
I was referring to the comment in that it was suggested I change the DOF, a setting which my camera doesn't have whereas I know you have some more options as to what's in focus by changing the aperture (given the right conditions yaduhyaduhyaduh)-- I'm quite aware and have heard many times that it's the person behind the camera that makes the difference, not the instrument itself.  I've been doing my studying and know what to expect when my saving finally amounts to the camera I have in mind.  I like your suggestion with the flash.  I've been experimenting putting tissues/tissue paper over the flash to help in situations that require a little manipulation-- the bare flash tends to ruin the sh*t out of most things ahah.

Your improvising is inspiring.
Logged
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5698



WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2009, 01:20:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MR.FEESH
I was referring to the comment in that it was suggested I change the DOF, a setting which my camera doesn't have whereas I know you have some more options as to what's in focus by changing the aperture (given the right conditions yaduhyaduhyaduh)-- I'm quite aware and have heard many times that it's the person behind the camera that makes the difference, not the instrument itself.  I've been doing my studying and know what to expect when my saving finally amounts to the camera I have in mind.  I like your suggestion with the flash.  I've been experimenting putting tissues/tissue paper over the flash to help in situations that require a little manipulation-- the bare flash tends to ruin the sh*t out of most things ahah.


If you can change the aperture on your camera you change the depth of field.  Depth of field is a factor of the f/stop used; i.e. f/8 has a larger depth of field than f/3.5 for example.

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6079



WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2009, 08:47:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: dalethorn
Try setting the flash to forced on, or always on, too add some fill light.

Whatever you do, don't follow this recommendation. On-camera flash utterly destroys the ambient light. What you get from on-camera flash is not what you saw.

If your camera has an aperture priority setting, using that and cranking down the aperture (increasing the aperture number) will let you increase depth of field, at the expense of shutter speed of course. To overcome some of the shutter speed loss you can increase ISO, though that'll introduce more noise. It's always a trade-off between these three things.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2009, 10:09:58 AM by RSL » Logged

MR.FEESH
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 132



WWW
« Reply #15 on: May 17, 2009, 10:58:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: dalethorn
Your improvising is inspiring.


Sarcasm...?



Quote from: wolfnowl
If you can change the aperture on your camera you change the depth of field.  Depth of field is a factor of the f/stop used; i.e. f/8 has a larger depth of field than f/3.5 for example.

Mike.


That's exactly what I mean.  My doesn't have aperture manipulation, whereas most or all DSLRs do.

Quote from: RSL
Whatever you do, don't follow this recommendation. On-camera flash utterly destroys the ambient light. What you get from on-camera flash is not what you saw.

If your camera has an aperture priority setting, using that and cranking down the aperture (increasing the aperture number) will let you increase depth of field, at the expense of shutter speed of course. To overcome some of the shutter speed loss you can increase ISO, though that'll introduce more noise. It's always a trade-off between these three things.


Yeah I know all of this 'theory'-- unfortunately my p&s basically only has auto EVERYTHING.  You might as well just eliminate me and let the camera walk around and take pics for itself.
Logged

Sigma SD14 w/ PG-21
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX Macro
Sigma 70mm F2.8 DG EX Macro
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6079



WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 17, 2009, 12:06:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MR.FEESH
Yeah I know all of this 'theory'-- unfortunately my p&s basically only has auto EVERYTHING.  You might as well just eliminate me and let the camera walk around and take pics for itself.

Actually, that's not "theory." But you're right, if you can't control aperture you're out of luck. That seems strange, though. I've had a raft of point and shoots over the past ten or so years and all of them would let you shift into aperture priority mode, though often with difficulty.
Logged

situgrrl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 342


WWW
« Reply #17 on: May 17, 2009, 01:07:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MR.FEESH
Sarcasm...?

I doubt it - many on this forum come here with issues with their gear asking advice on which company they should throw their money at.  You come to the forum with a camera so crippled it needs an iron lung and manage to make pictures better than some with many $$$$$ of kit.  Your perseverance certainly gains my respect.

The recommendation was that you use a smaller aperture to gain depth of field.  I've been reading your camera manual and the dummy (scene) modes can't help you I'm afraid.  However, if you turn off anti shake, it will decrease the shutter speed, increasing the aperture (hopefully!)  This might well mean that you need a tripod.  My favorite is http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/2837...ripod_with.html and it will keep you sweet with even a DSLR.  Using a tripod would also allow your hands to hold a reflector (white foamboard is the cheap answer) that would force mre light and therefore hopefully a tighter aperture.

FWIW though, is disagree entirely with RSL and think that were it all to be in focus, the subject would become rather lost.  None of this changes the fact that you could use  a new camera like few others right now.  Perhaps have a root around your local second hand shops or try KEH.
Logged

MR.FEESH
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 132



WWW
« Reply #18 on: May 17, 2009, 02:46:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: RSL
Actually, that's not "theory." But you're right, if you can't control aperture you're out of luck. That seems strange, though. I've had a raft of point and shoots over the past ten or so years and all of them would let you shift into aperture priority mode, though often with difficulty.


By theory, I meant...I've learned everything there is to learn without actually having one to experiment with.  Like I've researched aperture and f stops and know what all the numbers on lenses mean, shooting modes like raw, lens flaws like geometry and vignetting...the list go on forever.  I called it theory just because I mean I've never actually had the chance to see that when I set a lens to f/2.8, less of the background will be in focus than if I were shooting with f/32.
And I'm sure a lot of p&s cams have those sort of settings, but Im using an L18-- the L standing for "life", meaning it's just supposed to be used to take pictures of people at parties etc and has a strong enough flash to white out their face ahah.  AND it's even pretty low on the spectrum within the "Life" series.  So I figure I'm making out like a bandit with some of my pics  

Quote from: situgrrl
I doubt it - many on this forum come here with issues with their gear asking advice on which company they should throw their money at.  You come to the forum with a camera so crippled it needs an iron lung and manage to make pictures better than some with many $$$$$ of kit.  Your perseverance certainly gains my respect.

The recommendation was that you use a smaller aperture to gain depth of field.  I've been reading your camera manual and the dummy (scene) modes can't help you I'm afraid.  However, if you turn off anti shake, it will decrease the shutter speed, increasing the aperture (hopefully!)  This might well mean that you need a tripod.  My favorite is http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/2837...ripod_with.html and it will keep you sweet with even a DSLR.  Using a tripod would also allow your hands to hold a reflector (white foamboard is the cheap answer) that would force mre light and therefore hopefully a tighter aperture.

FWIW though, is disagree entirely with RSL and think that were it all to be in focus, the subject would become rather lost.  None of this changes the fact that you could use  a new camera like few others right now.  Perhaps have a root around your local second hand shops or try KEH.


1rst paragraph: WOW, perhaps the nicest thing anyone in the hobby has told me since I started.
2nd:  Hmm, that does make sense.  I really like the reflecting board idea, I think I'm going to start incorporating that-- I really like flower shots and that could definitely help.  As for a tripod, that seems nice.  Right now all of my money is in an envelope with the intention of getting a new camera, however.  I'm fairly surprised at the cost of "really good" tripods (seems like people here like gitzo).  Just astounding.
3rd:  Hmm perhaps it just comes down to a matter of personal preference...


Elby
Logged

Sigma SD14 w/ PG-21
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX Macro
Sigma 70mm F2.8 DG EX Macro
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6079



WWW
« Reply #19 on: May 17, 2009, 03:26:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MR.FEESH
3rd:  Hmm perhaps it just comes down to a matter of personal preference...
Elby

Yes, it does. But situgrrl didn't read my comment carefully enough. I wouldn't suggest the whole thing be in focus, but I do think more of it needs to be in focus -- especially the nearest part. I think I'd let the focus soften at the third mushroom and go all the way out by the third, but I have to admit I don't much care for fungus pictures, even though I've shot my share of them.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad