Here's a nice Peacock I found last year, its quite a large image mind.
http://www.wayno.myby.co.uk/peacock.jpg
taken with a canon 300d at 1/200s f/6.3 55mm (iso100)
Contructive critisism would be appreciated
Our photographs
Our photographs
Perhaps it would be nice for people to show off their recent/new photographs?
Here's a nice Peacock I found last year, its quite a large image mind.
http://www.wayno.myby.co.uk/peacock.jpg
taken with a canon 300d at 1/200s f/6.3 55mm (iso100)
Contructive critisism would be appreciated
Here's a nice Peacock I found last year, its quite a large image mind.
http://www.wayno.myby.co.uk/peacock.jpg
taken with a canon 300d at 1/200s f/6.3 55mm (iso100)
Contructive critisism would be appreciated
-
Pete Eeles
- Administrator & Stock Contributor
- Posts: 6763
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:10 pm
- Location: Thatcham, Berkshire
- Contact:
Nice shot!
I think it's a really nice photo Wayne - and good idea about using this forum to show off photos. Remember you're also welcome to set up your own gallery in the UK Butterflies website.
I'd also suggest you include the picture directly in the post (it saves a click!). Just use the "Add image to post" link below the text box. You'll get this result:
I think you've done a good job. My only suggestion would be to somehow increase the depth of field (smaller aperture) to make sure the wings are in focus - which is really difficult with such small creatures.
Cheers,
- Pete
I'd also suggest you include the picture directly in the post (it saves a click!). Just use the "Add image to post" link below the text box. You'll get this result:
I think you've done a good job. My only suggestion would be to somehow increase the depth of field (smaller aperture) to make sure the wings are in focus - which is really difficult with such small creatures.
Cheers,
- Pete
Excellent, didnt realise you could do it like that, thought it would put the full sized image in there
Hopefully this year I'll get a decent collection of photos and possibly make use of the Gallery feature.
Yeh that photo needs a bit more depth of field, I still find it very difficult balancing with shutter speed. (ok I should have used a tripod!)
Hopefully this year I'll get a decent collection of photos and possibly make use of the Gallery feature.
Yeh that photo needs a bit more depth of field, I still find it very difficult balancing with shutter speed. (ok I should have used a tripod!)
-
Pete Eeles
- Administrator & Stock Contributor
- Posts: 6763
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:10 pm
- Location: Thatcham, Berkshire
- Contact:
What - no tripod?
I'm willing to be corrected, but I don't think many butterfly photographers use a tripod in the field, other than maybe for the immature stages.
It seems to be a delicate balancing act of shutter speed and aperture. And you may benefit from using flash.
I wrote my thoughts up some time ago - take a look at http://www.ukbutterflies.co.uk/photography_article1.php.
This year I'm going to try and avoid using flash, and "upping" the ISO setting instead. I think the default will be ISO 200, 1/250s, shutter priority. We'll see
This, by the way, is with a Canon EOS 10D (digital SLR).
Cheers,
- Pete
It seems to be a delicate balancing act of shutter speed and aperture. And you may benefit from using flash.
I wrote my thoughts up some time ago - take a look at http://www.ukbutterflies.co.uk/photography_article1.php.
This year I'm going to try and avoid using flash, and "upping" the ISO setting instead. I think the default will be ISO 200, 1/250s, shutter priority. We'll see
This, by the way, is with a Canon EOS 10D (digital SLR).
Cheers,
- Pete
I'll second the remark from Pete about using a tripod, its rare I ever use one as its pretty useless most of the time out in the field (especially when photographing adults). As the camera I use at the moment is fairly limited I have to get pretty close to my subjects (always less than 1m and usually around 15cm) so I have had to develop my own stealth skills to get success, plus luck at times!
Never use flash either, I'm always on ISO 200 and usually an aperature of around 2.8 - 4.5, this seems to suit my setup which is a Fuji s7000.
Never use flash either, I'm always on ISO 200 and usually an aperature of around 2.8 - 4.5, this seems to suit my setup which is a Fuji s7000.
I agree that using a tripod in the field is difficult and sometimes impossible, especially in the heat of the day. However, on the few occasions I have managed to successfully use the tripod, I am much happier with the results, they're just indescribably sharper for two reasons; no camera shake, and the ability to use smaller apertures for greater depth of field.
A good tip for snapping butterflies using the tripod is to get up VERY early and catch them at first light when they are less jumpy and more accomodating of all your kit.
Equally, go out on days when the clouds are patchy in the sky, so there are regular periods of sun and long periods of shade. Orange-tips are especially easy in these circumstances... the minute the sun comes back out, they will all take to the air. Follow one until the sun goes behind a cloud again and note where it rests. As long as the sun stays behind the cloud, you can walk right up to him and literally push him off his roost! Of course, setting up the tripod and taking a few sharp pics is preferable.
To help with the speed of setting up, I use a Manfrotto 322RC head which I can highly recommend, even when you have a bulky 200mm and extension tubes attached!
Didn't mean this to turn into a lecture... maybe we should post techniques in a new thread!
A good tip for snapping butterflies using the tripod is to get up VERY early and catch them at first light when they are less jumpy and more accomodating of all your kit.
Equally, go out on days when the clouds are patchy in the sky, so there are regular periods of sun and long periods of shade. Orange-tips are especially easy in these circumstances... the minute the sun comes back out, they will all take to the air. Follow one until the sun goes behind a cloud again and note where it rests. As long as the sun stays behind the cloud, you can walk right up to him and literally push him off his roost! Of course, setting up the tripod and taking a few sharp pics is preferable.
To help with the speed of setting up, I use a Manfrotto 322RC head which I can highly recommend, even when you have a bulky 200mm and extension tubes attached!
Didn't mean this to turn into a lecture... maybe we should post techniques in a new thread!
-
Guest
Re: Our photographs
Hyperlink failure after three tries.Wayne wrote:Perhaps it would be nice for people to show off their recent/new photographs?
Here's a nice Peacock I found last year, its quite a large image mind.
http://www.wayno.myby.co.uk/peacock.jpg
taken with a canon 300d at 1/200s f/6.3 55mm (iso100)
Contructive critisism would be appreciated
Hi Guys - to solve this cumbersome tripod problem I invested in a very cheap monopod several years back and it's one of the best things I've ever bought. It shuts down to about ten inches which means you can leave it permanently attached to your camera even whilst it's hanging round your neck. Quick release clips means you can be ready for the shot within a few seconds and you're pefectly steady. I've done straight comparisons between shots taken with and without a monopod and although the difference is usually only slight I would personally never be without one.
-
Adrian Hoskins
- Posts: 54
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:09 pm
- Location: Havant, Hampshire
- Contact:
Increase the ISO
It's a lovely shot, well composed and with very natural colour. Natural light shots nearly always look better than flash, but I agree that it's very difficult to balance the shutter speed and aperture to get a sharp image with enough depth of field.
It's harder with 35mm because you have less depth of field - with digital the shorter focal length ( for the same angle of view ) gives noticeably more depth of field ( with the same aperture ), and you also have the advantage with many models that you have anti-shake to help keep the image sharp at slower shutter speeds.
A monopod is very useful, but make sure it's a strong one like the Benbo - a shaky monopod is worthless. Even a monopod can be awkward to use quickly in the field, so you need to practice your technique. If you approach slowly and steadily, you should still be able to get close with a 105mm lens ( 35mm equivalent ), and should be able to get more square-on to the butterfly, to keep the wings parallel to the film plane / sensor plane. That way you can get away with less depth of field. Also you can usefully increase the ISO setting on a digital to 200, which will give you a higher shutter speed and/or smaller aperture. Setting the ISO to 200 should not degrade the image - any decent digital ( APS or full frame ) with a resolution of 4 megapixels or higher should produce a high quality image at 200 ISO that will print to A4 size.
The other option is to use flash, which will freeze the movement, and the extra light will allow a smaller aperture for more depth of field. A natural light image nearly always looks better than a flash image however in terms of quality of light. It's worth compromising though - use the built-in flash on fill-in setting. The camera will automatically close down the aperture by about one extra stop - it does this to deliberately darken the background slightly to prevent double-images. In most cases the background still looks very natural, but you have greater sharpness and greater depth of field.
One of the great advantages of digital ( I shoot my record shots on digital, but prefer 35mm slides for my "quality" serious shots ), is that you can shoot dozens of shots of the same subject at no extra expense. Experiment - shoot some shots by natural light, some shots by mixed light ( sunlight with fill-in flash ), and some shots with flash as the main source. You can't really get away with the latter if the background is a long way behind the butterfly, as in your shot, but it works fine for butterflies basking on low foliage or on the ground.
Adrian Hoskins
It's harder with 35mm because you have less depth of field - with digital the shorter focal length ( for the same angle of view ) gives noticeably more depth of field ( with the same aperture ), and you also have the advantage with many models that you have anti-shake to help keep the image sharp at slower shutter speeds.
A monopod is very useful, but make sure it's a strong one like the Benbo - a shaky monopod is worthless. Even a monopod can be awkward to use quickly in the field, so you need to practice your technique. If you approach slowly and steadily, you should still be able to get close with a 105mm lens ( 35mm equivalent ), and should be able to get more square-on to the butterfly, to keep the wings parallel to the film plane / sensor plane. That way you can get away with less depth of field. Also you can usefully increase the ISO setting on a digital to 200, which will give you a higher shutter speed and/or smaller aperture. Setting the ISO to 200 should not degrade the image - any decent digital ( APS or full frame ) with a resolution of 4 megapixels or higher should produce a high quality image at 200 ISO that will print to A4 size.
The other option is to use flash, which will freeze the movement, and the extra light will allow a smaller aperture for more depth of field. A natural light image nearly always looks better than a flash image however in terms of quality of light. It's worth compromising though - use the built-in flash on fill-in setting. The camera will automatically close down the aperture by about one extra stop - it does this to deliberately darken the background slightly to prevent double-images. In most cases the background still looks very natural, but you have greater sharpness and greater depth of field.
One of the great advantages of digital ( I shoot my record shots on digital, but prefer 35mm slides for my "quality" serious shots ), is that you can shoot dozens of shots of the same subject at no extra expense. Experiment - shoot some shots by natural light, some shots by mixed light ( sunlight with fill-in flash ), and some shots with flash as the main source. You can't really get away with the latter if the background is a long way behind the butterfly, as in your shot, but it works fine for butterflies basking on low foliage or on the ground.
Adrian Hoskins
-
Guest
Here's more cheap tips:
Wear a white shirt/t-shirt/other apparell.
Why? If you take against the light then the shirt will act like a photo brolly and provide instant fill-in. It's so much softer and kinder than flash. This is more effective when the sun isn't directly overhead.
For ages I didn't realise why some shots that I took against the light were better than others until this dawned on me.
If a butterfly gets too much sunlight it will close its wings. Take any shots you want, then if you can operate your camera one-handed, use the other hand to carefully cast a shadow over the insect. Watch in awe as it either a) opens its wings obligingly
, or b) flies away 
.
Be aware that it will usually fly away when you remove your hand.
Turn your digital camera when around six feet away before lining up for the shot. Insects are susceptible to vibration and the whirr of the lens popping out can spook them if too close.
Wear a white shirt/t-shirt/other apparell.
Why? If you take against the light then the shirt will act like a photo brolly and provide instant fill-in. It's so much softer and kinder than flash. This is more effective when the sun isn't directly overhead.
For ages I didn't realise why some shots that I took against the light were better than others until this dawned on me.
If a butterfly gets too much sunlight it will close its wings. Take any shots you want, then if you can operate your camera one-handed, use the other hand to carefully cast a shadow over the insect. Watch in awe as it either a) opens its wings obligingly
, or b) flies away .Be aware that it will usually fly away when you remove your hand.
Turn your digital camera when around six feet away before lining up for the shot. Insects are susceptible to vibration and the whirr of the lens popping out can spook them if too close.
Thanks guys for your tips! I really do appreciate it
I've recently gotten a 100mm 2.8 Macro USM, and time off work next week!
I shall put on my white t-shirt and march out trying to remember your hints & tips
I'm planning to visit Bishop Middleham Quarry in Durham, hopefully get a shot of the Northern Argus and perhaps a Fritillery.
(never actually seen either species before so I'm somewhat excited)
I'll keep you informed...
Wayne
I've recently gotten a 100mm 2.8 Macro USM, and time off work next week!
I shall put on my white t-shirt and march out trying to remember your hints & tips
I'm planning to visit Bishop Middleham Quarry in Durham, hopefully get a shot of the Northern Argus and perhaps a Fritillery.
(never actually seen either species before so I'm somewhat excited)
I'll keep you informed...
Wayne
Update...
This year I've also been using ISO 200 and shutter priority (keeping it to 200-250).
I'm taking better photographs, I think practice and my new lens (and white t-shirt!) contributes
I've experemented with flash a bit, but I dont yet have a speedlite, just the onboard flash. It does still make a little bit difference adding some extra light in certain situations.
So, thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions!
This year I've also been using ISO 200 and shutter priority (keeping it to 200-250).
I'm taking better photographs, I think practice and my new lens (and white t-shirt!) contributes
I've experemented with flash a bit, but I dont yet have a speedlite, just the onboard flash. It does still make a little bit difference adding some extra light in certain situations.
So, thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions!
Wayne