November 22, 2017, 11:22:54 AM

Author Topic: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros  (Read 14058 times)

chrysoberyl

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 678
  • 6D
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #15 on: January 26, 2015, 11:37:00 AM »
Marsu42: A tent.  Hmm...this one:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1032648-REG/impact_dls_g_digital_light_shed_36x36x36.html

Would add 3.5 lbs. to my pack.  But for flowers close to the road it could be ideal, if it doesn't crush the surrounding vegetation.  A good thought.

And BTW, I collect only weeds (like Small White Asters), nothing else.  Except some Crane's Fly Orchids that were about to be destroyed in a development.  Those I transplanted to my back natural area, where they seem quite happy.

And I never chill or freeze insects.
6D, 80D, 5D IV, Zeiss Milvus 100mm Makro, Sigma 180mm/2.8 macro, Canon 100mm macro, Canon 24mm/1.4, Sigma 35/1.4, Tokina 16-28, Canon 1.4X III TC, Canon 2X III TC, Rokinon 14mm 2.4, Sigma 135mm ART.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #15 on: January 26, 2015, 11:37:00 AM »

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #16 on: January 26, 2015, 11:56:50 AM »
Marsu42: A tent.  Hmm...this one:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1032648-REG/impact_dls_g_digital_light_shed_36x36x36.html

Would add 3.5 lbs. to my pack.  But for flowers close to the road it could be ideal, if it doesn't crush the surrounding vegetation.  A good thought.

And BTW, I collect only weeds (like Small White Asters), nothing else.  Except some Crane's Fly Orchids that were about to be destroyed in a development.  Those I transplanted to my back natural area, where they seem quite happy.

And I never chill or freeze insects.
I think that light tent has a bottom, but I'm sure you could remove or cut it out.  If you try it, let us know how it works out.

Also, glad to hear you're a responsible nature photographer :)  My pet peeve (after those items) is when people shoot flowers in a studio or trained/captive animals and act like they were wild...but that's a subject for a whole other thread...
CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

chauncey

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #17 on: January 26, 2015, 12:48:31 PM »
Quote
Killing something beautiful in nature just to take a picture of it
Hmmm...ya can't kill it for a picture...are ya allowed to take a picture of it, then eat it?      ::)
The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
 A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.
http://1x.com/member/chauncey43

chrysoberyl

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 678
  • 6D
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #18 on: January 26, 2015, 03:23:34 PM »
chauncey: do you like harsh treatment?  But the answer is yes.
6D, 80D, 5D IV, Zeiss Milvus 100mm Makro, Sigma 180mm/2.8 macro, Canon 100mm macro, Canon 24mm/1.4, Sigma 35/1.4, Tokina 16-28, Canon 1.4X III TC, Canon 2X III TC, Rokinon 14mm 2.4, Sigma 135mm ART.

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 6316
  • Canon Pride.
    • Der Tierfotograf
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #19 on: January 26, 2015, 06:54:53 PM »
I think that light tent has a bottom, but I'm sure you could remove or cut it out.  If you try it, let us know how it works out.

I vaguely remember seeing versions that are designed for outdoor macro use, it's not that unusual to require soft light for an object on the ground. In any case, the "cut out" will work, an probably removing some sides as well. I imagine this solution is less hassle than to try to mount diffuser-reflectors.

Also, glad to hear you're a responsible nature photographer :)  My pet peeve (after those items) is when people shoot flowers in a studio or trained/captive animals and act like they were wild...but that's a subject for a whole other thread...

I agree wholeheartedly. In addition to that for my mushroom focus stacks I used to do there was no other choice, you cannot grow them at home or transport them there undamaged - the only solution is to set up some lighting outdoors and get some nice background. Alas, a lot of people don't seem to care if there's a really "wild" background, it looks like in a zoo/tropical garden or if it's shot in a studio :-\

anthonyd

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 161
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #20 on: January 26, 2015, 08:22:36 PM »
Quote
Killing something beautiful in nature just to take a picture of it
Hmmm...ya can't kill it for a picture...are ya allowed to take a picture of it, then eat it?      ::)
I always photograph my endangered wildflower stuffed turducken before eating it.

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2015, 12:12:10 PM »
Alas, a lot of people don't seem to care if there's a really "wild" background, it looks like in a zoo/tropical garden or if it's shot in a studio :-\
I have no idea what you're talking about - surely people like National Geographic don't share that opinion:

2012 Nat Geo Photo Contest Winners - Grand Prize Winner
/
Should Photographs Captured in Zoos Be Considered Legitimate ‘Nature’ Pics?
CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2015, 12:12:10 PM »

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 6316
  • Canon Pride.
    • Der Tierfotograf
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #22 on: January 27, 2015, 03:38:42 PM »
Alas, a lot of people don't seem to care if there's a really "wild" background, it looks like in a zoo/tropical garden or if it's shot in a studio :-\
I have no idea what you're talking about - surely people like National Geographic don't share that opinion:

Thanks for the interesting link!

At least with the free range horses I often shoot there's a huge difference between "zoo" and "wild" (or as wild as horses get in central europe). Next to the "fence in the background" problem, wild animals have behavior patterns you don't find in the zoo, esp. when it comes to interaction *between* animals. You can capture their physical form and basic behavior, but what an animal species defines is imho mostly lost in close captivity.

However, the NatGeo award shows that the difference is too elusive to make it into mainstream accepted knowledge. I suspect that's because there are so many amateur zoo photogs and visotors around that a big media corporation is too afraid to tackle the issue. Personally, I disagree completely with the stance quoted in the article:

Quote
As it happens, while I know some photographers feel that pictures of captive animals are inferior to photos captured of animals in the wild, as wonderful as it is to see animals in their natural habitat, I’ve always thought this is a ridiculous way to think. A Tiger, for example, in captivity is every bit as awesome, amazing, and gorgeous as a Tiger in the wild

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #23 on: January 27, 2015, 03:45:31 PM »
Alas, a lot of people don't seem to care if there's a really "wild" background, it looks like in a zoo/tropical garden or if it's shot in a studio :-\
I have no idea what you're talking about - surely people like National Geographic don't share that opinion:

Thanks for the interesting link!

At least with the free range horses I often shoot there's a huge difference between "zoo" and "wild" (or as wild as horses get in central europe). Next to the "fence in the background" problem, wild animals have behavior patterns you don't find in the zoo, esp. when it comes to interaction *between* animals. You can capture their physical form and basic behavior, but what an animal species defines is imho mostly lost in close captivity.

However, the NatGeo award shows that the difference is too elusive to make it into mainstream accepted knowledge. I suspect that's because there are so many amateur zoo photogs and visotors around that a big media corporation is too afraid to tackle the issue. Personally, I disagree completely with the stance quoted in the article:

Quote
As it happens, while I know some photographers feel that pictures of captive animals are inferior to photos captured of animals in the wild, as wonderful as it is to see animals in their natural habitat, I’ve always thought this is a ridiculous way to think. A Tiger, for example, in captivity is every bit as awesome, amazing, and gorgeous as a Tiger in the wild
I agree completely, but I'm sure we're in the minority.  I can tell you that many of the most popular photos in photo contests and places like 500px and Flickr were shot with captive animals or those in game parks, like Cabárceno Wildlife Park in Spain.
CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

NancyP

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1176
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #24 on: February 02, 2015, 10:28:14 AM »
Anatomy is the same, behavior is not. Personally I prefer to see behavioral photos or photos indicating adaptation to the environment (where's Waldo - hint, looks like a dead leaf). And part of my motivation is to show what you can see if you look closely in your local parks. Publicist for the local birds, fungi, insects, etc.

aclarkimages

  • PowerShot SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 3
Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #25 on: June 15, 2017, 12:41:47 PM »
I have a Lastolite TriGrip Diffuser but never tried it for flowers. It's possible to hold the diffuser in one hand (it has a handle or "grip" and is triangular in shape) and the camera in your right hand. It would be less than ideal though as you'd have limited range and movability. But what it would let you do is get a quick idea of how the flower would look with some test shots before setting up a tripod.

It also folds up fairly small. A bit expensive though and tbh I haven't really used it much. Seemed like a good idea at the time .... Hmmmm maybe I should try this flower thing.
That's exactly what I use - I have large two stop version and a smaller difflector version that also serves as a reflector.  The bigger version is nice because it blocks a bigger area, but I wish it was the 1 stop version as the light tends to get a little flat with it.  Alas, I needed the 2-stop version for mid-day portraits, which is what I bought it for...


I use a few of the small pocketboxes from Westcott that velcro with a strap to the head of flashes.  Definitely work will for diffusing light and if you want more you can use the diffusion cap on the flash in addition to the box.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Translucent umbrella for wildflower macros
« Reply #25 on: June 15, 2017, 12:41:47 PM »