Mega Fly

Terrific shot dear Cyrus, such excellent detail, above all the composition is just marvellous, CONGRATULATIONS from my end.

 

Best Regards

Dear Biswajit for the visit and the kind comment.

 

Kind regards.

Great Job Cyrus! You really know how to pay attention to detail! You never cease to amaze me!

Donna

 

Thank you Donna, it's very kind of you.

 

Cheers.

Oh my God, Cyrus!!!! how could I describe my feeling looking at this shot... How did you catch this fly and make so close shots??? This is so great! Do you publish your shots in professional magazines about insects and reptils???

Incredible detail as has been said above. And detail and sharpness to top Mark Plonsky's fly shots, one of which I have on my favs list, despite these insects not being a subject I would like to do. But then, I could never turn a macro of a fly photo into a work of art as you and Mark do consistently.

 

Here goes another to my favs list, even though I say I no longer rate anything.

 

PS: Did you tell Daria where you publish your photos??? Or are you waiting to be discovered by National Geographic?

 

Cheers

 

Maggie

WOW!! No comment, I dont have words.

Daria,
I thank you for the generous comment. I have had a couple of magazines interested but they needed the full size file and I wasn't sure I was ready to do that. I also have a couple proposal and suggestions for a series of these of a particular subject for which I have to do more shooting! I thank you again for the interest.

MM,
I REALLY do appreciate your visit and the very generous comment on this and many other photos of mine. your thoughtful input has been truly encouraging and inspiring all along.

Dear gerardo,
How delightful it is to see you stop by and commenting so kindly.
Best regards to all.

nothing to say...super shoot!!!

Thank you Luis for looking, your thoughts are well appreciated.

 

Cheers.

Superb macro shooting, amazing details.

I have to link you to another incredible marco I have found. Look at the lens this guy uses. reflection of the shooter in the spider's eye

Terrific macro

Mat and Peter for the encouraging comments, well appreciated.

 

Kind regards.

Thanks for commenting again and also thank you for the link. I just happened to have a shot of that spider in my archives and I just posted it. I will respond throughly to you in a short while and in much more detail about ins and outs of macro shots. I know what you are doing and that is what threads like this should be about, discussion oriented and educational.

 

With warm regards.

Maggie, An overview of Macro photography.A 1:1 Macro is defined as following:
In a typical crop sensor DSLR such as Canon 10D and 20D, Nikon D70, D50 and D2x, Fuji S2 and S3, the sensor size is around 15 MM by 24 MM or around 3/4 on inch by 1 inch. Now, if you have a subject which is 24 MM in length, for a 1:1 Macro, it should fill the frame from edge to edge, with NO room for further crops.
A 2:1 Macro is defined as following:
if you have a subject that is only 12 MM (1/2 inch) in total length, it should occupy the whole frame with no further room for further cropping. And finally, for a 4:1 Macro, a subject 6 MM (1/4 inch) in total length, should occupy the whole frame
Now, there are those who think capturing a 4:1 or a 5:1 macro is a matter of having the lens but this sentence is so far away from the reality as many other factors come to play. One literally becomes limited by the laws of physics, the available technology and one's skills as a Macro photographer.
At a 1:1 macro level, under a bright sun at F32 at a distance of one foot(31 CM), your DOF with a 180 MM Macro lens is less than 1/16 of an inch or about 1 MM. (Here,Depth of Field Calcularor) Your shutter speed at ISO 100 is 1/25 second or at ISO 400, 1/100 second which is barely enough for a moving subject. The slightest movement by the subject and it's out of focus.And don't forget, as you move up to higher F stops to achieve more DOF, Usually beyond F16, you become defraction limited which means that you start losing detail, here, good reading for you .
Now, at a 4:1 Macro level, the equation is quite different. For one thing, with a set up like the above, the effectiveness of your prescious light is reduced by 10 times and your DOF field much smaller. The tiniest movement by the subject or shake in the camera and you are out of luck and you have to locate your subject in your now much DARKER viewfinder.. This is all true for a live and moving subject. For a stationary subject, it's an easier task and that's why you see a lot of close macros made of dead or frozen subjects.What I have mentioned so far is only a part of the whole story and that is why Macro photography is the most challenging.
Now, by the above definition of a 4:1 macro, the following photo should fit the definition of a 4:1 Macro.

.

.

.

So, you see, sometimes it's hard to distinguish a crop from a full frame shot. Also, detail is not how sharp the hair sticks out but also detail in other areas, tonal range and transitions. Contrast is good but remember, it should not kills detail. Contrast also creates the illusion of sharpness and that's why you see over use of contrast specially in Macro shots.

 

Kind regards.

Thanks for all Cyrus. I have no time right now, but want to put this up as my last comment on photo so I get back to it later.

 

My first thought on glancing at all your work on this is that 'this should be a presentation or tutorial on macros.'

 

catch you later at which point I will probably edit this comment. :)

 

Later: I have read your explanations over more thoroughly, but of course am not yet up to speed on understanding. But it does begin to become understandable. Thanks for the links.

 

I think I understand about the effects of crops, though. It might look similar but is not really the same thing as a real macro.

 

I still think you should make this a presentation. I have it on my highest rated list and may just have to move it to the front page or so for reference when (if ever I get time) to try to do macros. Sometimes, I have found, it is good to be 'ready' to do a marco... when the opportunity presents itself. But then, oh no, I don't have the right lens, extenders, or light. I think maybe marcros are for the more dedicated photographer, more serious photographer, than I might ever become.

 

Thanks again for all the information and fine examples.

Don't get discouraged by what I have mentioned. Macro photography is fun, a lot of fun and you're certainly capable of taking great macro shots. At the level of 1:1 macro, like the damsel above, or even 2:1 macro, you need to have a decent macro lens and basic understanding and the INTEREST. The real difficulty comes when you move up to higher magnifications and SPECIALLY with a live, moving subject.
There is noting wrong with cropping your macro shot to get closer to your subject either , A 12 Meg shot, cropped at 100% will give you, roughly the look of a 4:1 Macro, specially if it's a clean shot with good detail and resolution but it would not be a full frame 4:1 macro and you will likely have no more detail or resolution for enlargement.

Cyrus, this was taken with an ISO of 800? I'm technically puzzled by the end product taken at this ISO in digital format. Can you help explain.

Regards, Dave

You'll laugh Cyrus, but after all this time I had to come back and change my rating...not "one" of the best-the "best" I've seen. It's the first time I felt bad about leaving a 6/6...probably fly prejudice, I live in NH and if you've been in our woods you know what I mean.

I am not laughing but rather I'm delighted you did that. Delighted not necessarily due to the fact that you changed your ratings, all decided and thought over all by yourself, but rather for the educational purposes. If I for example get a fair rating, that means that you have made a fair and informed judgement in your evaluation.
Yes, I am puzzled by some of us who rate most everything with a pair of 6s indiscriminately. As you'd probably agree, this does not provide any sort of helpful feedback.

I applaud you Mary for rethinking your ratings, I too do it often. As we grow and mature in our field of interest, our judgements improves and we may realize that may have over evaluated or under evaluated work of others. It seems to be a fair practice to reevaluate from time to time, not only to benefit the recipient of the reevaluation but also to dignify ourselves with a better sense of evaluation and judgement.
I also agree with you that our dislike for a subject matter should not influence our judgement in evaluation. If one does not like, understand or care for a Macro shot of a fly, it's best to move on to other stuff and there are plenty of great work around.

I live in Mass Mary and also been to NH many times and I kind of know your neck of woods!!
Kind regards.