Critiques
This photo currently has 3 conforming critiques.
Since there are already at least three conforming critiques, if you write a conforming critique for this photo, then you will receive only the usual one critique point every time another user rates your critique helpful.
Write a critique
If you find one of these critiques especially helpful--or especially unhelpful--then please take a moment to register your opinion by clicking one of the buttons to the right of the critique.
|
|
from hank008/Henry (651)
on March 22, 2005 1:24:03 AM CST
(3)
Like the spider, I think a little bit further back might help but like you've mentioned these shots tend to happen fast. Might I suggest one of those silly flash diffusers that attach with velcro. I use one with my Nikon FE2. It looks silly but when I angle the tilt or adjust the zoom on the flash it allows me to change the light and it can remove any hint that you're using flash. Of course the FE2 has TTL flash and that helps alot.
Reply
Show ratings
|
From narler/Nigel (942)
on April 2, 2005 9:05:10 AM CST
Hi,
Thanks for the information. With the diffuser does it help by reducing the flash intensity and therefore also reducing the intensity of the shadow thats cast by the flash? If yes then I may look at doing that.. Thanks.
I'll still endeavour to use 2 flashes though to help remove shadows all together, it's just an issue of cost and configuration that I have to overcome first.
Thanks for taking the time to comment on my photo.
Regards
Nigel.
Reply
|
|
From hank008/Henry (651)
on April 6, 2005 1:43:40 PM CDT
With the TTl flash metering I never have to worry about to much light. The gear does that for me. The diffuser does soften the shadows quite a bit, I've took shots where it was hard to tell flash was used. ( take a look at my shots of Wilma and Betty my two cats, it was used on them.) When I used this setup on my FM (no TTL) I found I had to experiment and yes adjust the power level of the flash. It definatly was in my best interests to bracket my exposures.
Reply
|
|
 |
|
 |  |  |
|
|
from wpb/Pat (1,033)
on March 10, 2005 2:52:55 AM CST
(3)
Not a bad photo of a spider. Compositionally, I would like the spider to be in the left part of the frame. The surface the spider is on is kind of busy and bright on the left, but it compliments the spider. In lieu of another flash, you could get a little white card and place it at an opposing angle to the flash, which would help fill in shadows. The spiders nicely in focus, but the photo is a little soft which is probably due to it being resized not having any unsharp mask applied, since you said you were against manipulation in Photoshop. However, I'm sure the original slide was sharper, so I'd hope thats something you'd be willing to do to make it more pleasing to display.
Reply
Show ratings
|
From narler/Nigel (942)
on March 10, 2005 4:37:03 AM CST
Thanks for the comments.
I would have liked to frame it a little better and/or have found a specimen on a different surface, but at all times I photograph the subject where it was found and as the lynx spider is a rover it's not always still long enough to setup and frame exactly as I'd like.
A card, mirror or reflective surface the other side would have helped but I'd be out of hands as this photo was taken hand held.. no tripod, so 1 hand for focus and one holding the camera / shutter activation, I'd need an assistant :) for anything else.
Oh I forgot to add to the description that I also used a 2x teleconverter, so that may have also impacted on sharpness slightly.
Reply
|
|
 |
|
 |  |  |
|
|
from otelo/Kirk (352)
on March 10, 2005 2:45:28 AM CST
(4)
Great macro shot! Also the background is a good choice.
I only have two suggestions:
1. better sharpness
2. the face area is too dark, a reflection panel or fill light would have avoided that.
thanks for sharing!
Reply
Show ratings
|
From narler/Nigel (942)
on March 10, 2005 4:41:10 AM CST
Thanks.
I'm not sure if the sharpenss issue is due to the scanner I use, or if a dedicated neg scanner would yield better results, or it could be a result of the teleconverter, or the distance to subject vs hand held.
The background is where I found the spider, as I always try and photograh the subject where it was found and with as little disturbance as possible, it was just lucky (or well chosen by the spider) that it blended in so well.
I wish I could have removed the shadow from the face and I'm looking into getting another bracket to mount an additional flash to help fillin sections like that.
Thanks for the comments.
Reply
|
|
 |
|
Comments
Comments are different from critiques. Comments carry no rating, you may write more than one comment per photo, and you may comment on your own photos. If you want to rate this photo, then you should write a critique instead.
Add a comment
From akaluke/Luke (1,656)
on March 13, 2005 10:15:21 PM CST
Possible to bounce the flash of a ceiling?
Reply
|
From narler/Nigel (942)
on April 17, 2005 9:08:49 AM CDT
Hi, Thanks for the thought, but this shot was not indoors.
Reply
|
|
Return to photos
|