Macro round is just around the corner. This could be another example of how I get hooked into a photo and don’t see its bad points until much much later.

Colours are as shot. A little sharpening was about it. I’ll probably play with it in Photoshop over the weekend, but I thought it was nice as a starter for 10.

As part of my messing with the Button flowers a few nights back, I also tried to get a nice tight macro shot.

There’s a macro competition in the camera club coming up shortly, so I wanted to do things “by the book”. A definition of macro photography being that the image on the film (I’m not sure what this film thing is) should be the same size as the object, but that up to 4 times smaller is also allowed. Now, I’ve no idea how you measure that in Digital world where cropping is so simple, but I decided to work to a simple rule for this shot…

The lens had to be sharp at 1:1 and focused at the minimum focus distance. For this shot I used a Canon EF 100mm F2.8 on my 400D. If you’re in the market for one, I’d recommend it.

To get the shot above, I shot at F/29 from a tripod. You can see that even with an aperture this small, the depth of field is still pretty shallow.

Focusing also required me making use of a Macro Rail for the first time. A Macro Rail is essentially a fine adjustment mount for your tripod and camera. In my case, the rail mounts to my existing tripod mount and then the camera mounts to it. Adjustment is performed along two axis by use of small screws. It’s pretty neat, though I’d suggest the ball mount I have isn’t the right choice for a tripod head in cases like this as the initial set up was a nightmare!

I’ve been fortunate enough to get my hands on a little Marumi ring flash unit for a while. Mostly I’m planning to use it to take some Macro shots, but I’m told ring flash works well for portrait light as well.

Given my reluctance to post (and therefore take) portraiture, I’m not going to comment on this aspect. Although, for reference, Marvin had a bit of the ring flash about him. And now I think of it, he was taken with a 100mm Macro lens as well….

… Anyway.

The nice thing about Ring Flash is the ability to get light to the front of your lens. When you’re shooting at a distance of 30cm and you’re using F22, you need a lot of light in a little area. Straight on flash can be an issue. It actually makes it almost possible to shoot Macro hands free.

This is actually a bobble my daughter has for her hair.

the Marumi seems like a decent little light. It’s a lot cheaper than the others on the market and I guess you do get what you pay for. The Marumi only has one bulb so no individual side control as offered by Canon ring flash. Also, it’s fully ETTL so there’s no manual control of the light (unless you use flash compensation on your camera).

However it does come with a set of adapter rings so mounting on a selection of lenses is possible, and it’s pretty quick to charge and recharge as well.

The light it throws off is pretty consistent, certainly meeting the challenges I gave it over the last day or two.

If you’re going to be spending your life with macro, invest in the Canon or Nikon ring flash. If you want something to supplement your gear or you’re shooting on a budget, I’d suggest taking a look at the Marumi.

Oh, and there is one for you Nikonites as well.

There’s a macro themed competition this year, so I’ve been trying to get the hang of macro photography. I guess the stereotype for the competition will be an inset shot and so I started out with those because I love stereotypes and it’s a decent way to practice focusing.

I ended up converting this to B&W as part of my messing about with the image and actually quite liked it.

I’d love it to be sharper though.

Here’s another shot of the mini’s I mentioned.

I’ve ended up with 15 pictures or differing degrees of like and dislike. Some feel over processed and some are definitely filler, but there are a few I like.

All in all, I think I’m happy with the outcome. I know in a similar situation a few months back I would have came out with a lot less than 15 images I’d show to people. So either I’m getting better at this sort of thing, or my standards are slipping.

God I hope it’s not my standards slipping…

 

 

Oh, and if rumours are true and a 7D is round the corner, I’d appreciate you all having a word with Santa for me!

I was asked to take some photographs of model cars tonight.

It seems there is a big anniversary coming up for Mini (40 years?) and since I had a camera I was asked if I would take some shots of classic model minis.

Not being one to say no to an opportunity to play with the camera, I jumped at the chance.

I took two styles of shot over the evening. A sort of typical archive approach, car at 45 degrees shot and a more adventurous shot. I’ll post a few of these over the coming weeks I guess.

Here’s one as a starter anyway.

 

I’m asked to do this sort of thing occasionally. Most everyone who knows me or knows me through friends or family knows I’m a bit of a photo nut. When I’m asked, I always make it clear I’m very amateur and still very much learning, but if they’re willing to loan me their toys, kids, whatever I’ll see what I can do. I make sure they understand they may get nothing out of it, but if I manage to take anything they’re welcome to it. It’s a great way to learn and to keep stimulated.

I guess what I’m saying is, make sure you’re available to improve your photography. If you’re like me, you only truly learn by taking pictures. And taking new pictures is a great way to learn…

Life moves pretty fast. You don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it. – Ferris Bueller

Things have been hectic of late. So much so that I could feel the world getting me down, my temper getting shorter and my attitude starting to suck.

I decided a day off was in order. A day off taking pictures I thought.

Well, I’ve spent my day off playing with my camera and watching TV and reading books and all those things. It’s been good.

Sometimes you really do need to take some time.

(And if that isn’t the cheesiest way to introduce a shot of a watch, I don’t know what is!)

No, this isn’t some sort of “…every Friday night, by the light of the moon…” confession.

So, what do you do when you want to try portrait photography. And macro photography. And it’s Friday and you’ve had a glass of wine. And there’s a good show on TV but it’s an add break. And your camera is sitting beside you?

Yup. you take pictures of your kids Barbie doll.

(f/16, 100mm, 1/125sec, ISO-200)

This was shot using my 400D with a Canon F2.8 100mm macro lens. Lighting was supplied by the pop up flash.

Some post processing was applied, including a little curves, some exposure highlighting of the left eye and a tweak to colours using LAB colour mode (applying an adjustment to the Lightness channel).

Anyway. It’s Friday night, the moons in the sky…

Following on from that game a week or so ago…

 

The 10 minute Chilli

I’m not as happy with this one.

One thing that constantly catches me out id the depth of field (DOF) on a Macro lens. When shooting a normal photograph, an aperture of F/13 will probably keep most everything in focus.

In a macro world, that is sadly not the case.

(f/13, 1/125, 100mm, ISO-100. Light from strobes to right and left through diffusing materials)

I mean, I know when it’s close the DOF is tight. But I mean, this tight? If you look at the blown up version, you can see that some of the tacks lose focus between the bottom and the point.

I actually like the photo. I’m just amazed at how shallow the DOF is.

Nothing particularly insightful to say about this. I just liked the texture of the rope.

It could maybe a little sharper. It could maybe do without the little red distraction in the background.

You know. When I started taking photographs I never realised I’d need to start learning animal, plant and now rock crystal names…

No idea what sort of rock crystal this is.

Still, it’s kinda pretty.

There is a great article in the January Digital SLR Photography magazine, describing a technique to create reflection of an object in a studio (or in your dining room if you don’t have one).

The technique seems pretty simple so I thought I’d give it a go tonight.

(f/8, 3.2secs, 100mm, ISO-100, 08/01/2009)

In summary, the technique is to place the item on a piece of glass sitting on a black cloth or card then using a light source (in my case a desk lamp) angle the light until you get a decent reflection.

Key thing - The glass needs to be clean. Really clean.

I guess I wasn’t too successful with this one. I like the glass, it’s sharp and clear, but the reflection isn’t as defined as some of the examples in the magazine. I’m not sure if that’s because of my lighting, my glass not being clean enough or some other factor.

But I thought you’d like to see it anyway.

Again with the macro lens.

(f/4.5, 1/125sec, 100mm, ISO-400)

 

I haven't been seeking to improve my photography for a while now. I guess it's showing in the pictures I'm taking and posting. There's no reason for this really. I'm enjoying my photography and I'm taking the pictures that please me.

It's a useful lesson if you're like me. You're not getting paid for this, so do what you like and sod the world.

Oh, and another reason you should do what you want. Remember I talked about the water competition I'd entered and how the judges comments were very harsh? Well, the inter-club results are out and the picture of the dripping tap got a low score whilst the droplets on silk shot got a quite remarkable  joint 2nd place in the beginners set. It's not important. It's just a good example of how photography is subjective.

It's been about two weeks since I last posted and 3 since I posted a photograph. It feels like longer.

I'd never planned on talking about me beyond my photography and I'm not going to get into it too much now. Suffice to say I encountered a health problem. I then had some issues with the medications given to me to handle the problem. But I'm feeling better now and hopefully on the road to some changes which will help as well.

And that's why it's been quiet.

Anyway, as part of all of this I haven't had the energy to pick up cameras for the last few weeks, but I took a walk today and to try and make my brain work I took along my camera.

I've mentioned Dermot's obsession (can I call it that?) with macro shots when confronted with views and landscapes, but I can kind of see why these days.

Anyhow, apart from the frost and the leaves, this little fella cheered me up by posing.

(No idea if he's red or gray, sorry)

I was playing with my flashgun tonight and decided to try and recreate a picture I'd seen in this Strobist post.

Because I was away from technology at the time, I had to try it from memory.

 

When compared to David's toy car, the highlights on mine are still very sharp and there are some burnt out patches on both pictures (I like them on the second car), but it's a fun thing to try.

 

Now the essence of David's post was related to light sources and what makes soft light or hard light, and to be honest I'm still trying to get my head round some of this so I'm not going to try and stick my understanding of it online just yet.

Still, it's a fun way to photograph toy cars.

I have problems with backgrounds quite a lot. I tend to see the subject in the viewfinder, like what I'm getting and press "snap" without ever considering the background of an image.

Take a look at this picture to see what I mean.

(f/3.2, 1/200sec, 100mm, ISO-200, 09/10/2008)

 

The water droplet is nice and sharp. I quite like the colouring effect I put on the image. I even kinda like the fact the tap is quite grubby and out of focus.

But the shadow of the tap forms a dark stripe across the picture and it just annoys me when I look at it now. I've tried cropping the picture to remove the head of the tap, but I felt it lost context when I did that.

So, lesson for today. (and one I'm still trying to learn dammit) is don't just look at the subject, look at the background before you press 'snap'.

 

Oh, and I have no clue as to what the strange pear shape reflection is in the water either!

Thanks to some advice from Paulo, I was able to re-examine how I was taking some of the water shots. Whilst I'm not convinced I'm up to this standard yet, I did repeat the water droplet experiment using some of the tips from his blog.

Suffice to say this is the first of lots of much improved drop shots that I got. More will follow.

I think I'm beginning to appreciate the club competition on a new level now. Never really having to work to an agenda before, I've always just taken pictures of things I like or things I thought might look nice. If I got a picture out of it, that was great. If I didn't, it was no big loss, like buses there'd be two just round the corner.

However, a subject as simple or as varied as "water" forces you into looking for shots which fulfil a brief, the sense of the clock ticking in the background is ever present. It took until today before I got past the deadline doom of the competition and realised that I wasn't actually that bothered about winning or losing or even just doing OK. I was in it for fun. Even if nobody liked my stuff (and believe me, the last photo I showed them got hammered), I was doing this to try and improve.

Funnily, right around the time I had that thought, I took the picture of the rose (see previous post) and the picture below.

In all honesty, I don't know if they'll be permitted in a competition where the theme is "water", but I like them and that's pretty much all that matters.

(f/5.6, 1/1000sec, 100mm, ISO-200, 05/10/08)

(f/5.6, 1/2500sec, 100mm, ISO-200, 05/10/2008)

 

I've no idea if this will be allowed as an entry for the "Water" round of the competition, but it's grown on me over the course of the day so it may well get an outing regardless. Maybe the top right is a little dark, but I'm not sure.

Sometimes it's a blessing that you can enter multiple prints.

This started of life as a yellow rose, but I just really like the sepia toning on it. It kills off the yellow in the flower and lets the water drops stand out a little more. And no, before you ask, these are natural water drops!

I've noticed what WingedMonkey seems to concentrate on macro flower shots in a lot of his updates and whilst I'm still a long way from some of his stuff, I am starting to see the attraction as you can end up with some lovely pictures.

(f/8, 1/1000sec, 100mm, ISO-200, 05/10/08)

I've kind of fallen into flower mode because of that water challenge. "Raindrops on roses" and all that... I'm still just shooting flowers in available light and I wonder what difference it would make if I was to start using reflections. Honestly, light is getting ever higher on my list of things to play around with. Maybe one day...

...take a picture of.

I recently joined the CPA, a photographic club in Belfast. I'd spent the summer debating the feasibility of doing a course and came to the conclusion that it was the one thing that might actually put me off photography - I'm always busy at home or with work and being forced into assignments and study would soon drive me up the wall.

So, I joined the CPA since a friend had recommended them to me last year. I've been to a few meetings at this stage and the talks are interesting. What's really good is seeing other peoples work and getting an honest assessment of some of the things I've taken. Everyone who comments here is great (and I thank you for it), but it's nice to have someone tell you in person that you suck (courtesy 'yerman'). that said, everyone has been brilliant.

One of the interesting features of the club is the competition nights. Essentially each month members submit photos on a topic and the best are sent forward into an inter-club competition.

Anyway, next months competition is on the subject of water. Yep. Water. That's it. No advice, no information, just one word. WATER.

Expect a lot of wet photographs over the next few weeks is all I can say.

OK, I know I have these pictures from last year.

I also have countless other pictures of beaches and lakes and such, but I really want to use the topic as a chance to take something new.

When I got home today, I decided to start simple, just squirting some water onto a tin tray...

(f/9, 1/40sec, 50mm,  +4 close up filter, ISO-400, 22/09/2008)

First thoughts...

This isn't sharp enough. Taken free hand with a close up filter at 1/40 just isn't going to work well. The decided lack of shadow/feature is also a bleurg (technical word).

I like the colour though. And be honest, if I didn't tell you it was rotated 180 degrees, you'd never know...

OK, whilst I look at the entries for that competition and deliberate and conjugate and all those things the bloke on Master Chef did I thought I'd show you this.

I took it today, more to prove to myself that it was impossible to use the close up filters with the 50mm lens on a tripod.

Well, you know what.

Turns out you can.

(f/10, 30sec, 50mm +10 filter, ISO-100, 02/07/08)

 

This is part of the back of one of those pin pressions toys (just in case you're interested).

I'm really going to have to pull my pennies together to get that Macro lens I mentioned. I can already see just how addictive taking that sort of picture could be.


(no exif information for you right now...)

One thing to note in this picture is that rather than make some tweaks in Lightroom myself to fix up contrast etc, I made use of a preset. Lightroom provides a number of "out of the box" presets which, while interesting, can be quite limited. However, there are a large number of presets available on the web (both charged for and free). these can have quite an effect on your image.

I'm not sure that using a preset isn't some form of cardinal sin - after all every image should be treated as a new challenge and one size probably shouldn't fit all. However, as a starting point (or if you like the effect), they can be really useful and give some impressive results.

One of the best preset selections I played with so far were referenced on ReallyJapans blog (kudos to him for sharing the find). You can find them here from the original author Kim Long (thanks to her for sharing them so generously).

Andrew pointed out a few flaws in yesterdays clips picture (I prefer to think of them as features), specifically that the focal clip was a little out of focus on the edge and there was some sort of smudge on it which was distracting.

Well, since he was right (but don't tell him I said it), here's some more clips.

(f/9, 1/60sec, 50mm, ISO-400, +10 filter used, 22/06/08)

 

As a point of note, I left the white balance much closer to the auto default setting this time, it gives the clips a nice bronze feel.

This is the reason why I want a macro lens.

(f/9, 1/20sec, 50mm, ISO-400, 22/06/08)

Ever since Dermot told me that taking photos of pink flowers was a nightmare I've been obsessed about trying it again. Basically any bright red or pink or purple flower.

These are still too contrasty or something. I'll get it one day.

 

(f/14, 1/30sec, 50mm, ISO-200, +10 close up  filter, 08/06/2008)

I mentioned previously about wanting to try out Macro photography, but being reluctant to spend serious money on a good lens. Well, I think I've found my interim solution.

Previous experiments with my Tamron 55-200 left me cold. I felt it was too soft to achieve what I wanted and to be honest it never seemed like "macro" just "really close up".

I then tried a reversal ring, which mounts your typical lens backwards for some crazy close up action. Whilst impressive, you were left using the default aperture of the lens and typically the depth of field was razor thin. Good fun though, and at £10 worth a play.

But now...

Following on from that experiment, I picked up an (ebay special) set of close up filters. In my case I got a set of 4 different filters (+1, +2, +4 and +10) in a neat little leather case for £8.99 (including postage). Like the reversal ring, they're available in a number of different thread sizes.

Not, lets be honest. They're not world class filters. They're cheap and cheerful. They're soft at times but they are good fun. And more importantly, they give good picture. The eye picture from a few weeks back was made using them.

They have a few advantages over the reversal ring.

• Because the lens is mounted normally, you have access to all your functions as normal
• You can mount one or more of the filters in combination to take you right up to +17 which is..... close
• They're fast to mount and unmount and you've no risk of messing up the internals of your camera or lens

Hopefully these photos show the sort of effects you can expect.

Normal - 50mm

(f/2.5, 1/4000sec, 50mm, ISO=200, 07/06/2008)

 

50mm with +10 filter

 

(f/16, 1/125sec, 50mm, ISO=200, 07/06/2008)

 

50mm with +10, +4, +2, +1 filters

(f/13, 1/200sec, 50mm, ISO=200, 07/06/2008)

 

As you can (hopefully) see, it is possible to get right into the object in question.

All in all, great fun to play with and something that will become part of my kit bag for the foreseeable.

The only question remains, what would happen if you put a close up filter on a macro lens...

 

You can read the first two parts of Macro on a budget here and here.

When I posted about the reversal ring a few weeks back, Dermot mentioned that there were other options to do this sort of thing on a budget including close-up filters.

I found that you can actually buy a set on Ebay for under £10. That makes them cheaper than the reversing ring option.

Well, I couldn't resist could I?

I'll post a proper review of them soon, but we took this on Friday afternoon while messing about and it's been kind of freaking me out ever since I uploaded it at the weekend.




Now, someone else tell me they can see a six in his eye! I mean, why would he have a six in his eye? Why would anyone have a six in their eye? It's just wrong.

It's also very very close.

Thanks to Gordons eye for not exploding while we hit it with the lens!

I NEED one of these.

OK.

I want one of those.

A lot.

Sadly, they cost many of your earth pounds and so I'm going to have to save and buy one later. So, in the absence of sponsorship from Canon (Mr Canon, if you're reading I am still open to offers), I decided to try something a bit different. Andrew suggested a reversal ring, and after convincing me it wasn't some sort of weird proposition and it wouldn't hurt I looked them up.

Essentially you use a little adapter ring to mount your lens on your camera backwards. The reversal ring comes with the appropriate lens mount for your camera plus a thread of your choice. I'm not sure I understand the physics of it, but essentially it allows near 1:1 (macro scale) image capture depending on the lens you use.

You can pick one up on Ebay for about a tenner.

Well, since it was cheap and a bit of a giggle I picked one up and had a play. The version I bought had a 52mm thread on  it to fit my 50mm F/1.8 lens. Honestly, the only reason I picked this one was because it was to hand when I did the ordering. The ring (with appropriate thread size) will work fine on the kit lens as well I reckon.

Here's some results.

 

None of these shots have been tweaked in any particular way in order to show you straight out of the camera what I achieved in about 5 minutes. There has been no cropping at all!

For the cost of a pizza (I'm a big lad, I like my pizzas man-size), it's a nice toy and there are only two real downsides that I've seen with it.

1. You have to live in manual world. you lose the connection to your lens when its reversed so the aperture just defaults to whatever the lens rests at and can't be adjusted that I could see. You'll need to set shutter speed manually, though at least the exposure meter on my 400D kept working which helped a lot.

2. You have to focus manually. Now this doesn't sound that bad, but look at those shots above again. Depth of field is razor thin, and I mean razor. You're probably playing with millimetres in focus and given the lens is mounted backwards it can be tough to do any adjustment. I found it was simplest to just move camera (and head) backwards and forwards.

 

OK, lets be honest. this is never going to replace a dedicated macro lens (and Mr Canon, if you are reading I'd love a loan of the 100mm one mentioned above). But, if you want something different to try it's not a bad way to spend ten quid and an afternoon. I've put it in my kit bag. You just never know...

It seems like it was only last week we were getting violent storms, snow flurries and frost. Then suddenly there was enough sun to send me to my garden for the day. More amazingly, there was enough sun to actually burn the back of my neck while I put up a fence! (Yep, that's right. Not only do I attempt to take photographs, I also attempt DIY). Maybe I'll combine things and take a photo of my fence one day...

In amongst my DIY madness, I encountered a couple of interesting flowers at my Dads house. As usual, I'm not as happy with these photos as I'd like. Annoyingly I think it's going to be a theme with flowers and the summer.

(F/5.6, 1/320sec, 200mm, ISO-100, 27/04/08)

 

I'm getting increasingly frustrated with my attempts at Macro photography. I think there are a couple of reasons for this.

Firstly, the lens I'm using, a Tamron 55-200 Macro that I got as part of the camera kit. Now don't get me wrong, it's a nice little lens for £70 or so. I just don't think it's as sharp or macro-esque as a dedicated lens.

Secondly, that 484rc2 ball head I bought recently. (The one I talked about here). There seems to be a little drift in it as you lock the head in place. You spend time getting the centre of your image dead centre in the view finder, you twist the lock bolt and it all slides ever so slightly out. Again, I know from various reviews and how-to's that I've read that say a ball head is not great for Macro photography.. But I'm hardly trying to photograph the head of a fly here!

Anyone any advice?

Last shot of the Causeway Coast not to feature the Causeway....

 

(f/5.6, 1/200sec, 200mm, ISO-100, 12/04/08)

 

This was another of those shots to prove out my new approach to hand held macro photography, making use of shutter priority and forcing it to work at 1/200sec.

There were two versions of this, one with White Balance set to auto and one (this one) with it set to shade. The shade setting makes the colours much more warm in this case and I felt it was the better of the two. I'm not normally  a white balance fiddler when out and about, but this time it seemed to fit (and besides Dermot was doing it).

I think in this case it falls down over the depth of focus. At the 200mm end, F/5.6 seems way too shallow and the blown up picture actually hurts my eyes a little. I've tried re-cropping it to see if it works better, but to no avail. I guess next time I need to consider dinking with the ISO as well if the F-stop is so wide.

During the trip up north I noticed Dermot was making a lot of use of his macro lens. I mean, I took him to see some of the best coast line in the island and he stands on a beach with a macro lens taking photos of rocks!

He did get me thinking though. Maybe there is something to looking at the little things, even when the big thing is so pretty.

Now, I've tried ad-hoc Macro stuff out and about before. Never with much success. The only macro lens I own is also my telephoto lens and at 200mm it's probably not the best option out there for this sort of thing. Certainly, every freehand shot I'd ever tried didn't work up until now.

While shooting in Carnlough, I noticed one of the old trailers had a lot of rust and some odd paint splashes so I decided to give a real close up on this stuff one more go. but this time I tried something a little different.

Instead of sticking to my trusty aperture priority, I switched to shutter priority and set it to 1/200. A lot of the books and websites I'd read talk about reciprocal values for focal length and shutter speed and use mumbo jumbo, but in English I figure it means...

 

To avoid shake, your shutter speed needs to be at least 1 over the focal length of the lens.

50mm needs at least 1/50

200mm needs at least 1/200

etc.

Yeah, I guess you all knew that. (And you probably all know what reciprocal means as well). I'm slightly embarrassed it took so long for me to realise an answer to my shaky hand syndrome was to change modes on the camera.

Anyway, on with the rust.

(1/200sec, F/5, 181mm, ISO-100, 12/04/08)

Sorry it’s been so quiet lately. A few different things had cropped up and… well, you know how it is.

I’m always keen to try different types of photography and over the last few months have been lucky enough to try a lot of different things (portraits, street shots, landscapes, night photography, HDR, the list goes on). A lot of the opportunities have come about by talking with people about their hobbies, telling them about mine and generally trying to be a good bloke. It’s always worth asking friends with interesting hobbies if you can tag along, you might get a great photo or even a great new hobby too.

 

A few weeks back, I was lucky enough to be invited by a work friend to a local rifle club to take some pictures. It was an excellent experience and I’ll share some of those pictures here over the next few days. In the meantime, he has my thanks!

This is a cropped close up of the barrel of a rifle – I don’t have the details of the weapon to hand – they’re not really important in this context.

It’s a good example of the ‘beauty in the eye’ type thing. I like the shot for the shallow depth of field, the reflections and the little marks showing the gun has had some use. The friend who owns the gun immediately commented on the hexagonal pattern around the barrel. Where I saw a nice image, he saw abrasions proving the rifling is pretty accurate apart from maybe a small throw to one side.

(Oh, for those of you scanning my images for signs of sensor dirt – keep it up! But you’re wasting your time here (I hope!), this image would have had the dirty marks cropped out).