Photoraph for Appraisal/Advice.

[Old Wolf]

Hello all. If you have read any of my other posts then you may know that I am trying to learn how to use a camera and it is all a bit trial and error.

Anyways, I managed to take a picture tonight that I am happy with and would appreciate your input.

I welcome all criticsm and advice and would really like to know how I could have improved it. What would you have done differently.

I am very eager to learn.

Details:
Nikon D90
1/250s. f/5.6 55mm
ISO 320 B

Stay Hydrated.

Old Wolf.

[andy brown]

Hi,
I'm no expert but like the composition! short of lots of practice and playing with settings in the field it takes some time to get the shot you are really happy with. even then generally you have to do a bit of editing, especially if you want to print something. I had a quick play I Photoshop (hope you don't mind) and here is what I would have done, not everyone's taste I'm sure but it is pretty subjective anyway.

Cheers

Andy

[MikeOxon]

I like it just as it is

[Catteraxe]

Hi Old Wolf,

You’ve captured a nice image. The thing with images is that they are entirely subjective, and this is borne out by Andy’s interpretation of your image and Mike’s subsequent comment that he preferred your original!
If there is a camera club near you it might be worth joining as its members can offer a wealth of advice on image capture and post-processing and from that you can develop your own style.
For my six penneth I note you are shooting wide open at f5.6. This gives a very shallow depth of field and the image is ‘soft’ on the antenna tips and the top of the upper wing. A smaller aperture will provide a greater depth of field and sharper image but you will need to balance that with the alteration to shutter speed and ISO. How close you are to your subject also matters.
Anyway, good luck with your photography and definitely persist with ‘trial and error’.

Kevin

[David M]

Very nice. Reminds me of the images our Czech member used to post (Marek).

[jonhd]

I agree with Mike - it's lovely 'as is'. I presume the subject was moving around on the end of that flimsy bit of grass, so not easy to focus!
The one compositional rule that I do take notice of is the 'rule of thirds' - see https://photographyicon.com/ruleofthirds/ - it can, of course be applied in post production; but, it certainly can lead to (IMHO) strangely 'unbalanced' images, so far as butterflies are concerned...

HTH, Jon

[Old Wolf]

Thanks for all of the comments and advice everyone.

I did type out a reply last night but accidentally closed all tabs and lost it all

Andy: Thanks and no I don't mind at all. I put it here for everyone's input. I can see how your editing has sharpened the image and made the butterfly stand out more. I haven't even started looking at post editing but you have given me some idead on what I can achieve, thanks.

Mike: Thanks.

Kevin: Thanks for the advice. I hadn't noticed the softening of the antenna until you mentioned it as I suppose I was looking at it as more of a 'whole'. This will be something I will be looking at in the future. That is a very valid point about it being subjective (as mentioned by Andy as well), I suppose that as long as I am happy with the result then I have achieved what I set out to do.

David: Thanks.

Jon: Thanks, the rule of thirds is not something I am aware of so will be looking into it. Thanks for the advice.

I appreciate all of you taking the time to help me in my quest and I hope to take up much more of your time when I get more pictures I am happy with

[Jack Harrison]

The "rule of thirds" should really be called the "guidance of thirds". It is good guidance most of the time but like all things, there are occasions when it is better to ignore.

I am sure though that you Old Wolf will have reallised that such guidance exists without being aware that it has a formal name.
Think for example of TV newsreaders. Their heads are placed near the top (ie on the one-third line) of the screen. I have witnessed occasions when the camera obviously slipped and the head is in the middle. It then looks very wrong.

But the rule IS there to be broken. Think of the case where you take a picture of someone bending down who is photographing a butterfly. It might but most likely might not, be appropriate to have that butterfly photographer's head near the top.

I have been a photographer for some 67 years and am still learning. A lifetime hobby (like butterflying).

Jack

[Neil Freeman]

Hi Old Wolf,

First of all I will say that I don't consider myself a 'photographer', rather someone who is interested in butterflies who happens to take photos of them. I take my photos primarily for my own enjoyment but am always pleased if others like them too. I have little interest in the technical side of photography but have basic understanding of composition and stuff like the 'rule of thirds', even if I choose to ignore it half the time

Having said that, I spent a couple of minutes with your photo and did this;

I do not own Photoshop and just use a free download called Photoscape which enables me to crop and resize and do some basic post processing which is all I am interested in.

Cheers,

Neil

[Gruditch]

Its a good image, I like Andy browns edit. I think Andy has done a bit of digital gardening, better that than disturbing the butterfly. Agree with Jacks rule of thirds and all that. Rarely does a butterfly image work, with the subject slap bang in the middle.


Regards Gary

[Jack Harrison]

I have just been looking at some of the photos I took as a 14 to 18 year old (in the 1950s)
While they don't all follow the "rule of thirds" I suspect I might have instinctively understood it.
Although I was a butterfly enthusiast all those years ago, I hadn't quite refined the technique of close-up photography.
That became easier when SLRs became more affordable

http://www.weatherjackwx.co.uk/Gt.Yarmo ... th-01.html

None of this Privacy nonsense nor any "relevant advertising".
If you think you might catch something awful by viewing pictures of old fishing boats, etc, then stay clear

Jack

[Jack Harrison]

TV item prompted me to this (Landscape Photographer of the Year):

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=anton ... 40&bih=796

Antony Spencer is a superb photographer and he illustrates perfectly when to use and when to break the "rule of thirds".

I will be studying his photos and will no doubt pick up a lot of excellent ideas.

Jack

[Catteraxe]

Cracking images by Anthony Spencer. Of course he also makes use of one of the great staples of landscape photography, namely lead-in lines. Great stuff.

Kevin.

[sonomoha]

Hej Wolfie (-:
That is a lovely shot.
I am not a photographer but I happen to go around with cameras to photograph animals for my own interest.
For butterflies, there are generally two basic approaches: the very close shots and the shots with context. While in the first case you focus on details, the second case is very inclusive of the butterfly's natural environment. From your shot to the interpretations posted, you can see that already. Everything in-between those basic approaches is all about searching for your own style. Mind the light and basic concepts of composition. cheers (-:

[Old Wolf]

Hej Wolfie (-:
That is a lovely shot.
I am not a photographer but I happen to go around with cameras to photograph animals for my own interest.
For butterflies, there are generally two basic approaches: the very close shots and the shots with context. While in the first case you focus on details, the second case is very inclusive of the butterfly's natural environment. From your shot to the interpretations posted, you can see that already. Everything in-between those basic approaches is all about searching for your own style. Mind the light and basic concepts of composition. cheers (-:

Thanks for the feedback and advice Sonomoha. My quest continues