How Do I Look In Pink?

Entirely spontaneous, not posed or encouraged in any way. I was out

shooting in the garden, and along came this green, spotted beetle,

obviously female judging from the polka dots, and she paused along the

'runway' just long enough for one shot. It's one of my first using a

B+W 5x filter. ISO 100, ƒ/4.5, 1/80. Y'know, I wondered if Ms. Beetle

had any sense of how smashing her green looked against the flower's

pink! That, and the flower's natural sensuality make (IMO) for a

not-so-common close-up insect shot. I'm most interested to know if you

agree (or not) about the color combo and the natural composition. I

appreciate any comments you care to leave.

Great point of the view & DOF;vivid contrast;exquisite composition;crisp details;all form to eye catching result;lovely macro, David! Best wish Richard H; Out of Canada

Richard, Thanks for coming by and taking a long look. I appreciate your thoughtful comments, and I'm delighted you like this so well!

I think the color combo works really well. It really is a very lively shot and you've shown a great sense of overall design. Very good focusing. The key line around the edge bugs me (no pun intended) a little because the other pink edges are so soft and curved. Doesn't seem like you'd want to accentuate the edge of the frame for that reason. Regardless, it's a very eye-catching and vivid photo.

Hi Fred! Glad you like this... mother nature gets all the credit for the color combo! As for the edge (you called it a "key line." Am I learning a new term here? Anyway, as usual, you've encouraged me to think beyond where I was... within the frame and not beyond it. Softening those edges will likely help focus attention on the bug more... I'll try some variations. Thanks for the detailed analysis and your reactions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keyline

 

Having been a typesetter/typographer by trade, these terms are old hat to me. Key line is still used quite a bit, even in the internet age. All it really means, when used by lay people, is a very thin line used as a boundary or border. The thinnest key lines are known as hair lines (and some hair lines I know are quite thin as well).

Hey! I resemble that remark about ultra thin hairlines! Unless you think of it as an extremely high forehead... ^_^

 

Thanks for the reference. I was pretty sure that was the gist of it... my father was a graphic artist who did hand lettering, silk screen, and the like. So, I know a little bit about registration, cropping lines, etc. Obviously, another word, particularly in terms of photographs (unless preparing for print) would be border. Maybe there should be another term for the transition between image and no image... hmmm.

 

I fiddled with PS awhile, and this is what I came up with without really knowing how to generate such an effect. Is this in the direction you were thinking?

What if you were allow it to bleed off the edge. "Bleed," yet another printing term, whereby the color or image actually goes right to edge of the page. Borderless. I don't know if you can do that technically with the kind of 3-D frame you've created, but you probably can. The reason it's called "bleed" is that, unbeknownst to the viewer, the page being printed is actually bigger than the page that makes the final cut. Crop marks are placed on that bigger page where the cut is to be made and colors or images that will run right up to the edge of the printed page will actually extend (bleed) into that outer margin area. When the cut is made, that ensures that the color will go right to the edge of the page, even if the cut, which often happens, is not exactly straight or exactly in place. In other words, here I am imagining seeing the pink and deeper red go all the way to the edge of what I'll call the raised canvas, with the gray drop shadow remaining as it is. No white edge at all.

Bleed, now there's a term I should know, right?! Actually, I do know, and when I'm home I'll give it a try... no problem since I always save at least one finished copy without frame. Really, for the most part, I only do the frames for presentation here. I much appreciate all the time you've given me on this shot, new terms, and encouragement to look and think outside the frame. I do have to be careful not to get too focused and miss bigger pictures. Thanks!

Reading you and Fred's exchanges brings back memories. I worked as a stat camera operator, shooting halftones and line copy for paste up. I also did a stint as a film stripper. In both cases I ended up in the press room fairly often. All those prep trades are gone now however as you both noted, much of the terminology remains.

 

I like this image quite a bit. The dof work well, informing me of the petals but clearly ocusing attention on the spotted little beasty. The division of the frame into thirds has a harmonious feel and the bug sits at just the right point in the composition. I do wish the bug itself had a little more sharpness but this is not a critical factor to my mind.

Interesting to know of your press room experience. What's a "stat camera"? And the prep stuff... yep, all gone, or rolled into software and done by computers. Terms have a way of developing a life of their own, or become the name for a class or type of thing.

 

Glad you like the little beasty, and that you commented on the composition, since I worked on that aspect quite intently and for awhile. The focus on my green and black buddy isn't razor sharp, and the pic would no doubt pop if were as tac sharp as I suspect the lens and filter can produce. I don't think the camera or the critter were stable or stationary enough to get the focus spot on as we'd both like better, and because of the +5 filter, the dof was quite shallow. I need to play with the lens and filter combo some more to get more familiar with where it can and can't focus, and its optimal focal distance. I'd been shooting with the filter for twenty or thirty minutes that first day I had it, and happened to be able to grab this. I'm looking forward to having more time to work with the close-up filters I got... a +3 and and +5... B+W - not coated, but made with Schott glass, and I'm using a NIkkor 28-105 AF D Macro. It's looking like it's a good combination, but I need to work with it some more.

 

Thanks for stopping by and for the info about you! I appreciate your careful examination and your comments.

I love the candy floss pink and the bright lime green. They are playful, whimsical and appealing. I love the composition and the charming little subject. I think this is very sweet and girly. I think this would be a wonderful peice of art for a little girl's bedroom wall. I like the frame, although I understand what Fred is saying and he does know his stuff. It would also look good "bled" and glass framed. My only, tiny, little suggestion would be to darken that brown background to a navy/black, like the spots on the beetle. You may not be able to do this without losing the definition on the beetle's head and pinchers. I can't see on my screen if there is enought light there to have a bit of contrast there. Linda

The very slight softness of the beetle is not really working against you to any larger degree in this one. The more I look at this the more I question my original comments as I do not think tack sharp would fit into this scene. Sometimes the effect of having a single plane in focus in a macro can be interesting. like the edge of the beetles shell for example.

 

Finding the time to get out and do some shooting with a new set up is the best way to figure out the parameters. I have had my 60 mm macro lens for a year now and I'm still discovering the new approaches to dof and composition that it offers. Back in the spring I picked up a lens baby and have yet to produce more than one or two worthwhile images with it. I find that my creativity can be stimulated by a difference lens. It is only after I wander around with it on the camera long enough that I begin to combine creativity with enough technique that I start getting what I want out of the set up. You are doing a great job of mastering this set up. Enjoy the close up filters they can be a lot of fun.

 

FWIW something that was suggested to me and which I find works well with macro is this. Once you have the rough focus close to where it needs to be, try doing the final fine focusing by leaning in or out from the subject with the camera rather than using the lenses focusing system or the focus ring. That is of course assuming you are shooting hand held. Another thing I sometimes do is set the camera up to take a burst of shots and fire them off while slowly leaning in to get final focus. Basically just increasing the odds that one of them will have that perfect point of focus I was looking for.

 

BTW a " stat " camera was a large copy camera weighting hundreds of pounds. It had its own adjustable light sources and a flat bed below the lens on which to place art work, photographs etc. The film came in large sheets which were cut to size and load in the top of the camera. It is basically a very large stationary view camera mounted in a frame pointing downwards. In some cases the cameras were mounted horizontally and traveled on a rail while the copy board was mounted to the wall. In some shops that I worked in, the stat camera was used by the strippers. In better shops they had a dedicated employee to take care of all the camera and film work.

 

Wikepedia has a blurb

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stat_camera

Too perfect for words! How lucky she stopped for her photo op!

Yep, getting out and taking lots of pics with new gear is the way to go. That's what I want to do, and I will, maybe in segments given time constraints, but they'll add up. It's really interesting that you mentioned focusing by moving the camera. I did use that technique a bit the day this pic was taken. Of course, that's what's happening when using a bellows set-up, moving the lens along the track, and when using a microscope (done just a touch of that) it's all about moving the "objective" (aka: lens) closer or farther from the slide. Given the focusing mechanisms, not to mention auto focus with the digital cameras, one has to be as old as we are to think about moving oneself while focusing!

 

The point you made, about carrying something around long enough, is intriguing to me. I don't think there's any way to be aware of it until after it's happened, but there does come a moment that whatever we're carrying around gets incorporated in such a way that we can use it as an extension of ourselves, and don't have to consciously concentrate on what we're doing, save for going after whatever we happen to be after. One of the many amazing features of the human brain!

 

I've seen what were called "copy cameras," so if I'm understanding, a Stat camera is a more specific term for the same. Surprisingly large pieces of equipment... I guess the same work gets done by scanners now?

 

Thanks for the additional info, and the re-look at the pic, and for the encouragement about using the close-up filters. Now, if I could just cut back a bit on the day gig... ;-)

 

 

Hilarye, thanks very much for looking and for the great review!

Interesting that you mentioned bellows and microscopes. I used to love using a bellows on my old manual film camera and I still use a microscope quite often. The stat camera had a huge bellows with which you racked the lens in or out along a heavy metal rail. Perhaps that is why the techniques seems so natural to me and you. I seem to recall you making some previous reference to using a bellows on you camera.

 

I too am fascinated by that point when a piece of equipment suddenly stops being foreign and becomes an extension of the mind and body. I concur that we seem to often notice these occurances, after the fact. It is a great feeling and I believe it is in part what motivates me to check out new adventures.

 

Off topic but I have been takings sea kayaking lessons. Although I have a huge amount to learn, I get brief flashes when the boat and my body move and react as one, as well as lots of moments when the boat and I are at odds and I flip the kayak finding myself sitting upside down underwater :-)

 

I hope you find yourself with a bit of free time to chase around the local flora and fauna and I look forward to seeing what you track down and capture.

David, this is a long thread, so I will not read it now as not to be influenced, first I like the title, immediatly makes me smile again. you look good in pink... ;-)) it is a nice timing, the pink is like framing the bug, which is well placed on the frame.Good light and nice composition, ( I still like very much the pervious I commented on),

 

Later,I agree with Linda to darken a bit the brown BG,and I find the general softness appealing to me.

David, I like this shot very much aesthetically. I don't find it lacking any sharpness that I genuinely miss -- particularly once I click for the larger view.

 

I have taken a quick read of the comments above and I don't think anyone mentioned the dark-red background. I wanted to say just how important I feel that element of the image is for me.

 

I do like the softness and the perfect pinks and greens. But, I think much of why the beetle really pops off of the leaf and is the star of the show has to do with the contrasting tonalities as much as the colours. The strong, shiny black legs, spots and head all combine to really draw my eye straight to the insect. If that background wasn't notably brighter than those darker segments of the insect, I do not think this would work nearly as well as it does here. Yet, the differing red colour helps keep it separate from the forms of the flower.

 

The highlights are nicely controlled here too. The brightest elements that are not the small specular highlights on the beetle are out of focus and that help contain my eye from focusing upon them.

 

Anyways, nicely done indeed.

 

P.S. I like the crisper line to the soft edged version posted in the comments. I just don't like THAT soft an edge! I'd personally try it with the black stroke-border and drop-shadow, but without the white stroke.

Hey, Ian. I'm glad you like this shot, and I agree very much about the background (a row of red leaved shrubbery, actually) and how it helps set off the bug. It'd be much too harsh and distracting if the bg were darker. Would that I could take more credit for the bg, but it just happens to border the lilies I was shooting. I *did* see it and thought it would likely work well.

 

Anyway, I'm delighted that you like it, and I appreciate all your observant and detailed thoughts and comments. BTW, thanks for noticing the specular highlight, and especially for it's lack of brightness. It's tamed, I think, because of using natural light that was a bit directional, but mostly diffused. greater luminance of the reflection probably would be distracting, and might lend a cartoon-like feel to the bug.