cyrus khamak

I agree with everthing Mat has already said and more. The only thing that you may want to consider is a color balamce as it seems shifted towards blue a tad or it may just be my monitor.

 

Cheers.

Very pretty colors and interesting behavior from the doves and a fine capture on your part.

 

good thing we don't all like the same thing otherwise it would be a pretty boring world! I actually like the adobe wall in the lower part of the frame. with the design on it, it reminds me of the ancient Egyptian artifacts and architecture. It also puts the birds at a fine vertical spot for my taste.

 

Cgeers.

I'm glad you stopped by and thank you for the nice comment. Like you, yourself, once said, these photos should be viewed with a black background, oh, well!

Sorry about the friend and I hope he/she is resting in peace.

 

I like your photo as there is quite a bit of action in it and I think I can see the Devil's face!

 

I may shoot some more fire this winter, see how it goes. I did a few shot last year including the attached file. this was taken with a 10.5MM!! it's a full frame shot and the lend was right in the fine. It was so hot in there that I had to wear thick gloves! I'm glad my lens survived the torture it was put through.

 

cheers.

.

There are a few reasons why I posted the above crop.
First and foremost, I'd like to break the "rules" here and there, specially when they do not necessarily improve the image the way it is intended to be viewed. I guess you are referring to the suggestion that"leave some space in the direction to which the model is looking". That is fine but the intention here was to have the emphasis on the eyes and for the same reason I did not frame the head above the forehead, as it would have been unnecessary information.
Second reason is the fact that this photo was cropped this way for an 8x10 Print and I decided to post it here in the same format mainly to be able to provide a larger photo for viewing(I'm no longer posting large photos to provide an option of 'view larger'. Therefore a 680 pixel resolution of a wider photo would have been a smaller photo).
Third, if you look at the original crop which would have been used for a 12X18 print, there is not a great improvement for the intended purpose of emphasizing on the eyes, to my opinion, or is there? The photo would have been technically more sound on the surface, but I really do not care about that at times like this.
I am uploading the photo below which is the full frame and in it's original crop. Please let me know if that works better for you.By the way, he's a boy!
Cheers.

Huy, Mohsen and Maggie for the visit, appreciated.

Cheers.

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.

What a strange and exotic looking bird, haven't seen one of these at all.Thank you for posting this.

 

Cheers.

This is a beautiful capture with fine detail in all of it's tonal range. I like the framing too.

 

Cheers.

Satish and Antony for looking and commenting.

Best wishes.

There is a cold and desolate mood here and it's well composed.

 

Cheers.

You always manage to squeeze that extra angle out of your compositions. I hope you have good insurance for those eyes! Good DOF at F8 as well.

 

Regards.

Hello folks,

The reptile is about 5 inches excluding the tail. This was taken on a coffee table. The colors on the reptile are there but the lighting were as follows:

The light on right comes from a TV screen and the light on the left comes from a UV lamp. There was a Tungsten Regular incandescent light)source of light in the background, in the other room and there was a Tungsten ceiling lamp.Thanks for the comments.

Regards,

Thank you for the visit and the nice comment.

 

Cheers.

What a flattering comment to receive from you. As you may know, this is a very small spider who was not in the mood for modeling!

 

Thanks for the visit,

 

Cheers.

Yes, he has four eye, imagine that!!
I left a long response on the other photo for you and I'm sure you are going to read it, you always do! ;)
Thanks for the visit and the comment.
Cheers.

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.

.

.

.

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.

Everything has worked out well for you and your little buddy, the mantis, good job my friend.

 

Cheers.

What beautiful colors on this bird, designed by mother nature. It seems like you had the focus on the chest area but nevertheless a very good job on your part specially comsidering the limitations.

 

Cheers.

Thank you my friend for the warm welcome and thank you for the visit as well.

The story behind this shot:

 

Walked to the basement to take the lawn mower to cut the grass in the back yard. as soon as I got out of the basement door, I found this spider behind the door in the back yard. Forgot about the grass and took him inside and put him on this plant. The bugger is a rather fast moving one and likes to hide underneath of leaves.

 

Anyway, I had my camera and the strobe handy(you see the flash head in his eyes) and started to photograph. It became a very frustrating shoot out as I ended up constantly moving and turning the plant around. Before I could manually focus, the guy had already moved elsewhere. I was able to take three or four shots and luckily this one came out to be the better one.

 

End of story and the lawn didn't get cut as it was already later in the day!

 

Cheers.

I urge you not to be so modest as you know a lot and you have taken it for granted.

 

With a 15 months old who is very active and constantly moves around, you will bound to have a few shots that are not so perfect. In situations like this when you are shooting at low aperture and ambient lighting, you may also have a shot or two that are not focused the way you'd like them to be. To answer your question more precisely, I took about 12 shots and I got 5 shots that I'm happy with. I may post a couple more soon.

 

Thank you for the visit and I agree, I like this shot for the same reason as you do.

 

Best regards.