After applying your advice, Blushing Beauty Tulip

[Wink Jones]

Yesterday, I posted this photo and asked for help.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Today, there was no rain so I ran the sprinkler for ten minutes.

I tried the advice to keep the camera chip more perpendicular to the subject. I found that at F1.8 either the front or the middle was in focus, and all did not look very great. This beautiful bud was bent over and hanging down rather than pointing up and none of the photos I got after shaking off much of the water were worth processing, so I went to a newer bud. Nothing that I took at f1.8 was worth doing.

I had better results at 4.0.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

1/2000 F4 ISO 250 20mm F1.8 prime lens

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

1/1250 F4 ISO 250 20mm F1.8 prime lens

Not too bad, but I lost the beautiful background. The wind was whipping these all around and I set the shutter for continuous 10 frames per second. I got a LOT of shots in a very short time, these are the two best and I will not be entering either of them in the fair...

This was a fun experiment. I like the background of the f1.8 but I think I will need to take that photo and then merge the f4 or even an f8 tulip on that background to get what I truly want.

Your thoughts are welcome.

 

[MikeJ]

Wink - I like the last one (at f4) almost as much as the original, so here's my $0.02:

I think what was so compelling in the original photo was the creamy, OOF background that really made the tulip pop. I also shoot the D500, which unfortunately doesn't do in-camera focus stacking (like, say, the D850), so you'd have to do it manually. I think a combination of a shallower DOF (maybe 2.0 or 2.8) with focus stacking would get you closer to your desired outcome (or maybe mine!). You mentioned whipping wind, so a tripod probably wouldn't help.

I also like the slightly off-centered tulip in the original (rule of thirds?).

Hopefully others will chime in and give more advice. In the meantime, great start, and like was recommended to me on one of my threads...PRACTICE.

Great start, Wink!

 

[Chris K]

Shooting macro with a wide angle is a pretty tough assignment! A few suggestions to get the smooth background you’re looking for:

1) Try to push your background further away and/or get closer to your subject. Note that if you get closer to your subject you’ll have to stop down even more (which might be counter-productive).

2) Try a low-angle shot to put the sky in the background. If you have a flash, you can use that for some fill light so the sky isn’t blown out, but be conservative to retain the nice, fragile look of the flower.

3) Use a lens with a longer focal length. A 100mm lens at f/5.6 would have a much smoother background than a 20mm.

4) If you have a flash, try putting a softbox on it and fire it from one side for some accent lighting. If you don’t have a flash, on a sunny day you might try a reflector.

That’s an attractive flower, and I think it’s worth the effort you’re putting in!

 

[Wink Jones]

Falling asleep, will give proper responses to both of you tomorrow. Thank you both.

 

[ElenaH]

I lost the beautiful background

as @Chris K alerady said - try with a longer focal length. It gives more bokeh than bigger aperture. Sometimes comming closer also works (but mostly for tele-photo lens) but you need than to close aperture even more to get all in focus.
Well done!

 

[Wink Jones]

Wink - I like the last one (at f4) almost as much as the original, so here's my $0.02:

I think what was so compelling in the original photo was the creamy, OOF background that really made the tulip pop. I also shoot the D500, which unfortunately doesn't do in-camera focus stacking (like, say, the D850), so you'd have to do it manually. I think a combination of a shallower DOF (maybe 2.0 or 2.8) with focus stacking would get you closer to your desired outcome (or maybe mine!). You mentioned whipping wind, so a tripod probably wouldn't help.

I also like the slightly off-centered tulip in the original (rule of thirds?).

Hopefully others will chime in and give more advice. In the meantime, great start, and like was recommended to me on one of my threads...PRACTICE.

Great start, Wink!

Thanks Mike,

I shake like an old woman when I get into position for the shot, so hand held stacking is out of the question for me. I am going to get my 105 2.8 lens from my D7100 that is attached to my photo box for jewelry and take some more photos.

 

[Wink Jones]

Shooting macro with a wide angle is a pretty tough assignment! A few suggestions to get the smooth background you’re looking for:

1) Try to push your background further away and/or get closer to your subject. Note that if you get closer to your subject you’ll have to stop down even more (which might be counter-productive).

I am going to get my 105 2.8 lens and give that a try. The only way to do as you suggest above would be to crawl on my belly like a reptile and my wife dislikes it when I crush her flowers and get my clothes all muddy. (It sprinkled a little bit and the water drops on the flowers should be perfect.)

2) Try a low-angle shot to put the sky in the background. If you have a flash, you can use that for some fill light so the sky isn’t blown out, but be conservative to retain the nice, fragile look of the flower.

See above

3) Use a lens with a longer focal length. A 100mm lens at f/5.6 would have a much smoother background than a 20mm.

I had a close up lens on my 105 and that made me get too close to the bulb, could not get the whole bulb in the shot. Took off the close up lens. I think I have some nice shots on the card, but time will tell...

4) If you have a flash, try putting a softbox on it and fire it from one side for some accent lighting. If you don’t have a flash, on a sunny day you might try a reflector.

Soggy overcast light, I am loving what I see on the back of the camera.

That’s an attractive flower, and I think it’s worth the effort you’re putting in!

Thank you, I am having fun with it. I will report back after I get a chance to process the photos. I have to walk the dog now.

 

[Wink Jones]

as @Chris K alerady said - try with a longer focal length. It gives more bokeh than bigger aperture. Sometimes comming closer also works (but mostly for tele-photo lens) but you need than to close aperture even more to get all in focus.
Well done!

Thank you. I am going to enjoy processing the photos I just took, hopefully at least one of the will be a winner.

 

[Wink Jones]

Sigh. None were great, none of the hand held were even passible, so I got the tripod and spent some time setting it up and 2 of ten shots were even worth taking a second look at. I will say this, the 105 is much harder to grab an exposure with as so much of the frame is full. Add a little waving wind and oops...

The background is great again with the 105, so the advice from Chris K and ElanaH was spot on.

Here is the first with the 105 at 4.0

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Here is the only other marginally usable shot...

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

So, more practice is definitely needed. I should also have upped the ISO so that I would have had faster shutter speeds with the flowers waving back and forth.

It is now dark outside, who knows what tomorrow will bring?

 

[ElenaH]

@Wink Jones , great images but the second one looks for me a bit shaken? Can it be?
Ref.#1 when working with 105 MC you can try to close aperture eben more than F4. I would try the whole series of apertures. Then you will know all about DoF and boken of this lens. And the distance to the subject is very important, too! I noticed that Macro-lenses have normally better bokeh than normal lenses. And this is becasue of minimum distance to the subject. We can get closer and sometimes are not even aware about it. And the closer we get the shallow DoF is and the better the bokeh. The same actually applies to animal and people photography. You can get the same beautiful smooth bokeh if you are shooting with 500mm staying far away or if you have 105mm portarait lens and stay close.
And yes, distance to background is also important. I keep it in mind in any kind of photography in macro and in wildlife. The far is background the better.

 

[Wink Jones]

Okay, I had a revelation early this morning while reading the post from ElenaH and thought that if the 105 is good, perhaps the 70 - 300 would be even better. Once I had fixed breakfast and God turned on the lights outside, I turned on the sprinkler for 2 minutes to get some water droplets and went inside to get the camera and tripod.

I spent WAY too much time setting things up with the tripod and was having the devil's own time getting a focus. WHAT THE BANGING HECK is going on I thought, and more than once!

UH HUH! I had somehow managed to hit the lock lever while "practicing." Once I figured that out, I got some keepers and with far less pain in my back and knees as from further away I did not need to contort so much to get a shot. (I only figured it out because I asked here some months ago and received immediate answers from people here as to what I had done to cause myself so much misery.)

Then as I was about to pick up and come inside, I realized with the longer lens, I did not even need to use the tripod so I banged out another dozen keepable shots. It will be this evening before I can process them, as I need to take my wife and dog for a walk, do some housekeeping cook lunch and dinner and then go to see my youngest grandson play flag football this evening.

I know this for sure, I have a new photo about to be hung from my wall, I just need to figure out which one I like the most!

 

[Wink Jones]

I snuck a few minutes before making lunch. Here are the two I like the best, but I have many that are all better than the starting photos posted above. I sincerely thank those who contributed to my learning process.

Here is the first, actually the second to last picture that I took this morning. It is of the original flower I posted, somewhat more open now than then. It is actually fully opened now that it has had a couple of hours of sun, but I caught it just after sunrise so it was still partially closed.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

This was taken hand held and is much better than any I got of it with the tripod.

Next is the new bud that I was using yesterday.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

I found that F8 was much to tight and left nothing of the background in question.

Thoughts and comments welcome.

 

[Bigmo]

They look great to me.

 

[Wink Jones]

Thank you

 

[MikeJ]

I agree! Very nicely done, you've made a ton of progress!

 

[Wink Jones]

Very nicely done, you've made a ton of progress!

Lol. You hit that nail on the head. It has been a wonderful learning experience.

 

[Wink Jones]

Okay, last two images from me in this thread. I was so excited with the keepability of my 70 to 300 pictures that I completely forgot about the phone pictures that I took just before putting on the longer lens.

I have to add that I am VERY impressed with the ability to use the masks in the Lightroom app on my phone.

Here is a photo of the picture as taken, I will then post a picture of the same blossom after I processed it. Not the same photo, as I did not think to save it prior to processing. I used the subject mask to lower the exposure, add some contrast and texture, and adjust the saturation. I then added another subject mask and inverted it to adjust the exposure, lesson the sharpness and contrast in the background. No way does this have the wonderful bokeh of the longer lens, but it is a keeper just for the flower.

It has been years since I actually tried to post process a phone photo in Lightroom's app, but I will be doing much more often in the future, as it is now so much more user friendly than the last time I tried to use it.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Again, I thank those who took the time to comment on the pictures and make suggestions. I also thank those that liked the photos, that in itself is a good form of feed back. This forum ROCKS!

 

[Chris K]

Nicely done, Wink!

Regarding the 105mm, if you aren’t completely nauseated at all the testing, I suggest one more thing to close the books on this experience:

I noticed that as your zoom photos were taken on a sunny day, the shutter speeds were very fast. 1/3200 and 1/4000. I also noticed your shutter speeds with the 105mm were much slower (1/80 and 1/125). Finally, you mentioned it was windy when you were shooting with the 105mm.

In my experience, 1/80 is not fast enough for handheld close-ups unless the subject is 100% immobile (ie: a rock). I try to shoot 1/250 at minimum, and I’m happy if I can go faster.

While I’d be happy with this image taken with the zoom, and call it a day, I bet if you went back out with your 105mm and shot with a shutter speed of 1/1000, you’d find the 105mm would be at least as sharp as the zoom. Depending on conditions your ISO might climb a bit, but even on that windy day you would have only needed ISO 2000, which is well within the capabilities of the camera.

Like I said, I think you should be happy with the zoom photo. It’s very nice! But if you are left wondering why you didn’t like the 105mm as much, I think I see the reason, and I’d encourage you to give it another shot, so the next time you need the 105, you have a good idea how to get a shot as nice as you got with your zoom.

 

[jeffnles1]

I think what makes the first photo so compelling to me is the single out of focus pink tulip in the upper left part of the frame. That just keeps my eye in the photo. It is very natural and the soft pastels and even how the lower third of the tulip is sharp focus and that gradually moves to blurred and becomes part of the background. I like the first photo. With flowers and even macro, not everything has to be in focus nor does every photo need to be a focus stack. Take advantage of the out of focus areas to allow the viewer to concentrate on those parts of the scene you thought were most important.

 

[Wink Jones]

Thank you Chris K.

I was in a very awkward position, I think with a tripod, but I may be disremembering. I do remember that I was kneeling on a rock wall with one leg and bending over trying to get to the eye piece as I could not compose properly with the live view on a vertically held camera. I discovered that my tripod with its current head sucks at lining up vertical images. Works incredibly well for horizontal landscapes and is delightfully compact when traveling. (This is the Peak Designs travel tripod.)

I do remember being frustrated with myself for not using a higher ISO to get the motion overcome. I would be willing to try your suggestion, but the blooms are fully open now and much less interesting subjects than they were earlier.

The advantage for me, with the zoom, was that I could sit or kneel on cushions to get the shot without sending my knees into screaming fits or my back into torment. I was shooting from several feet further away and did not have to contort so to line up the shot. Then when I suddenly realized I could do it hand held from this far away and upped the ISO, things came together quickly.

Actually I find 1/250 about my minimum for hand held as at 75, I tend to shake like a leaf and need the speed.

 

[Wink Jones]

I think what makes the first photo so compelling to me is the single out of focus pink tulip in the upper left part of the frame. That just keeps my eye in the photo. It is very natural and the soft pastels and even how the lower third of the tulip is sharp focus and that gradually moves to blurred and becomes part of the background. I like the first photo. With flowers and even macro, not everything has to be in focus nor does every photo need to be a focus stack. Take advantage of the out of focus areas to allow the viewer to concentrate on those parts of the scene you thought were most important.

Thank you. I like the photo better now, as I never thought about it in the manner that you suggest. One of the things I am coming to love most about my photography addiction is that there are so many ways to look at things, and even had I become serious in my youth, I would never have been able to learn all I want to know. Now, as a geezer, I am so excited to know I can learn so much so rapidly and never run out of things to learn.