Menage a trois
- Thread starter chauncey
- Start date
To me, it is a macro as soon as it goes closer than the MFD of your lens especially with a magnification greater than 1.
Anyway, nice work. I cannot complain about your stacking technique. I am still learning. I don't dare 375 yet.
Anyway, nice work. I cannot complain about your stacking technique. I am still learning. I don't dare 375 yet.
Upvote
0
chauncey said:You might not call it macro but...there are 375 images that were stacked and merged...6' wide!
very nice, but out of curiosity - why?
Upvote
0
daft question; but @ 6inches wide surely you could achieve this level of depth of field @ f22?
Upvote
0
Why...for the same reason that I'm involved in this insane hobby...just to see if I could. ;D
It is 72 inches wide at 300ppi...2.07GB. The full frontal orchid is 2 inches wide in real life.
I have not yet done minor repair work visible at 100%.
It is 72 inches wide at 300ppi...2.07GB. The full frontal orchid is 2 inches wide in real life.
I have not yet done minor repair work visible at 100%.
Upvote
0
Superb effort!!!
And I doubt very much that shoot at f/22 could yield the same level as sharpness as achieved here.
So what's your next project hmmmm?
And I doubt very much that shoot at f/22 could yield the same level as sharpness as achieved here.
So what's your next project hmmmm?
Upvote
0
Besisika said:
I believe macro is defined as when the image is captured at 1:1 or more. And to get closer than the MFD can only be done with extention tubes?
Upvote
0
Gear used>tripod mounted, rather dated 1Ds3 with a 180 macro attached at close to MFD>tethered to monitor using Canon Utility Software for live view shooting.
Lighting was four 100 watt LED lights bouncing light off the walls and ceiling, two of these http://www.amazon.com/Mighty-Bright-40511-Xtraflex2-Book/dp/1933622717/ref=pd_sim_b_3?ie=UTF8&refRID=0M6PBQ20QW21KM36ZFJS attached to camera mount, with black cloth as backdrop.
Is oblivious that I can't do anything expensive or fancy.
The tethered LV shoot was computer controlled using the arrows to move focus point in/out, one after another until the entire focus gamut is achieved. In this case it required 4-5 camera movements to capture an entire flower with each movement requiring 50-80 stacks at f/8. All stacking and merging done in PS CC.
Lighting was four 100 watt LED lights bouncing light off the walls and ceiling, two of these http://www.amazon.com/Mighty-Bright-40511-Xtraflex2-Book/dp/1933622717/ref=pd_sim_b_3?ie=UTF8&refRID=0M6PBQ20QW21KM36ZFJS attached to camera mount, with black cloth as backdrop.
Is oblivious that I can't do anything expensive or fancy.
The tethered LV shoot was computer controlled using the arrows to move focus point in/out, one after another until the entire focus gamut is achieved. In this case it required 4-5 camera movements to capture an entire flower with each movement requiring 50-80 stacks at f/8. All stacking and merging done in PS CC.
Upvote
0
BLFPhoto
Canon EOS user since '91...
chauncey said:
Fancy isn't the point. The light is flat and directionless here. All you need to do is to create directionality to the light. This image is a really good documentary representation of the plants, but we don't really get their character.
Bring the lights in from off axis, and from a single side. Use 2-3 on one side. Use one of the four for "fill" from the opposite side. If you used 2 on one side, one for fill, then you could even use one for a back light to gain separation from the black background.
Seriously, given the lights and the size of the subject, it's a matter of moving your lights just a few inches here and you would raise the game tremendously.
Photography is all about seeing the light and making it work for you, whether you're photographing flowers, bugs, people, or mountains.
Upvote
0
I clicked here thinking this would be something WAY different. WAY WAY different. ;D
Nicely captured none-the-less.
Nicely captured none-the-less.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
