Polarizer for Macro Photography?

<p>So I was told by someone that for floral macro photography, or flower photography in general that a circular polarizer is good to use - to add saturation to colors and I suppose in certain conditions to reduce hazy light reflecting on foliage. But with a touch of wind and for some of the shots I felt myself wanting all the light I could get. I started having some skepticism about using the polarizer on the macro lens for floral shots unless perhaps there is no wind....<br /><br /><br />As it relates, I was shooting water lilies mid-day (that is when the darn things bloom unfortunately) and was shading the light (didnt bring my diffuser...grrr) and using a silver lined small reflector to put light back on the specimens...that seemed to work ok...see these photos in my macro folder..the ones of the water lilies.<br /><br /><br />I just wanted to quickly get any feeback about the use of this filter for such macro shots? <br /><br />Thanks,<br />Ellery</p>

<p>Why not just shoot on a cloudy day or use a diffuser of some type. A polarizer lens while shooting macro may or may not help, but one thing for sure, you will lose 2 stops. </p>

<p>I've done a fair bit of close-up photography of flowers and cannot think of much use for a polariser. It <em>may</em> be valuable sometimes when dealing with reflective leaves and petals. In general, though, the need for longer exposures or wider apertures will be a handicap.</p>

<p>It can be useful, but not as something you just leave on for every picture. Cross polarization with flash is another possibility, just make sure the resulting somewhat unreal colors are what you want. The wind presents no problem, either.</p>

<p>http://www.naturescapes.net/042004/wh0404.htm</p>

<p>http://singhray.blogspot.com/2007/11/capture-better-macrophotos-by.html</p>

<p>Well, you're sort of right. A polarizer certainly can reduce reflections and enhance saturation, depending on the angle of the light hitting the specimen, but you do lose a couple of stops along the way. Sometimes you can merely shift the direction you're photographing from and totally avoid the thought of a polarizer. Some specimens (many flowers, for instance) you can place a small clamp on the stems so that they move much less in light breezes. Water lillies, my experience is you just need to find the right time of day and position yourself to avoid glare, usually a low angle. See the sample below from my pond..</p><div></div>

<p>Just as a technical point - shooting flowers is commonly not so much "macro" as "close focus. I could see it helping to reduce reflected light in some cases, but I've not found much need for it in a lot of flower shooting. I know I used a polarizer in a few shots of water lilies, but in looking over the images I can't really pick any out.</p>

<p>I don' think I have ever used one for a macro. Real macros very rarely have reflections that need to be reduced. Shots like Stephen's do, but as JDM pointed out, those might be better called close focus rather than macro. Moreover, key difficulties with macro are shallow DOF and insufficient light, so I would not want to lose two stops. If lighting is harsh, then you can use something like a weberly diffuser.<br>

Positioning yourself to avoid undesirable reflections and capture desirable ones is often a better alternative.<br>

<img src="http://dkoretz.smugmug.com/Flowers/Flowers-and-mushrooms/MG4974/959971172_aSBbP-L.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>PS: I left one thing out, and the edit option is gone. I would consider the picture I posted to be close focus, not macro, and the flower fills a small enough part of the frame that there is room for reflections. With most macros, the flower would fill much more of the frame, leaving less room for reflections.</p>

Excellent points - some suspicions confirmed - other misconceptions corrected :)

 

Ps - I forgot my diffuser grrrrrrr

 

Why not just another day? Working dad with a 2 yr old and wife that works full time too - a free day or half day to shoot

only comes from time to time - I do hope to get back there and shoot in different light

<p>+1 JDM </p>

<p>It is shame that the advertising industry miss appropriated the term 'macro' to confuse newcomers. If you were shooting the stamen of a flower you could be macro shooting but rarely if the whole flower. It also confuses those trying to help because we don't know what the question relates to.</p>

<p>most of the shots I am speaking of are not 1:1 macro...mostly likely in the "close up" range....I am aware of the terminology, I just generalized there for a moment...<br /><br />You all answered my question I think perfectly...thanks.</p>