www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

Denise wrote:... and to photograph my new baby tomorrow.

And make sure it is "baby" (singular) since Orange-tip larvae are cannibalistic

Cheers,

- Pete

Polly wrote:I'm looking forward to next year already.... please put my name down on the list Pete

Sure thing - and hope you're up and about soon.

Cheers,

- Pete

Nice to meet everyone and a great workshop
Thanks & well done Pete & big thanks to all in BC Hants and IOW branches for the venue and support!
Special thanks to Roger, Gary & Lisa for providing such good company and suggesting a great place to eat at the Star - yummy puddings, eh Lisa!
(Went back to Bentley Wood this morning and tried to put some of the things into practice - so this one's for you, Gary & Lisa for encouraging me to go back....) Regards too from Erja Liisa; she too found it really useful; thanks for all tips and advice.
(She also says that it was nice to meet such a knowledgeable and enthusiastic bunch of butterfly nuts )
Nick

yummy puddings, eh Lisa!

Hi Nick, they sure were, could have eaten three more though!
Glad you found the pb's - we went back later in the day, and didn't find any, but it had gotten really cloudy by then.
It was great to finaly meet you and Erja.

After listening closely to the talks on technique and equipment including flash and when to use it (thanks Roger) I tried to photograph my Orange-tip egg on the Garlic Mustard plant that Susie kindly brought for me. As I have a captive audience I took ages trying to get a good shot.
Without flash, even though this morning was sunny gave awful results I don't have any flash gear except my on board flash, so I gave that a go. The photo is better, but I feel that it is too bright now and has lost some of the detail. (funny thing is, that a year ago I would have been pleased as punch with this!) I tried to diffuse the light with a number of means, (you would have died laughing if you could have seen me) even using a torch at one point, but I can't get an image as good as Pete's on the index pages. Any help here would be much appreciated.
Cheers
Denise
ps. Only one egg Pete!

This is a really good shot, Denise, so you should be pleased!

One thing you've certainly managed to achieve is balancing flash with the ambient light. But perhaps this is where you might get better results by playing around a bit.

Specifically, either direct sunlight or flash is needed to light the subject. But you also need a fairly slow shutter speed to ensure that the ambient light is also included in the shot - otherwise you'll end up with a black background.

Here's what I generally do with eggs:

1. Use a tripod.
2. Manually focus.
3. Set a slowish shutter speed (e.g. 1 second).
4. Use flash (inbuilt or ring).
5. Use a remote cable.

In addition, I'll typically play around with ISO settings so that I can maximise the depth of field. I might also use "mirror lockup" where the mirror no longer becomes a factor because the duration is determined by me pressing the button the remote to start and end the exposure.

I wondering if your in-built flash is a little too direct on the egg. You could try diffusing the light from it somehow.

Cheers,

- Pete

I'll have another go tomorrow, and hopefully get a better result.
I'm in the process of making a home diffuser for the on board flash, and I will get my old tripod out. I took these on a monopod in a breeze which wasn't the easiest thing to do with such a tiny subject. No remote cable, so I will just have to be very careful and lucky. I did play with the ISO but not the shutter speed.
Thanks Pete.
Watch this space.
Denise

Denise wrote:I'll have another go tomorrow, and hopefully get a better result.
I'm in the process of making a home diffuser for the on board flash, and I will get my old tripod out. I took these on a monopod in a breeze which wasn't the easiest thing to do with such a tiny subject. No remote cable, so I will just have to be very careful and lucky. I did play with the ISO but not the shutter speed.
Thanks Pete.
Watch this space.
Denise

Hi Denise

I was going to mention this when tripods and shutter remote were being discussed yesterday. If you don't have a remote shutter you can always use the camera's inbuilt time delay function as a way of activating the shutter release without having to touch the camera. Just remember to change it back to the normal shutter mode after use.

Hope this helps

Bill

Thank you Bill. I had forgotten about time delay!
Denise

Gwenhwyfar wrote:

...yummy puddings, eh Lisa!

could have eaten three more though!

Yes! French cooking to thank for the small portions, I guess!
(Went into the Eastern Clearing around 10am; saw a couple of PBs in the first half-hour then the sun came out for about an hour and there were about 5 flying around the ditch in the first clearing....lots of Brimstones & OT's too; also saw a small copper. Are the Grizzled/Dingies out there yet? We didn't see any....)
N&E

Are the Grizzled/Dingies out there yet? We didn't see any....)

The Grizzleds and Dingys are around, but not easily found at Bentley - alot of the sites, in our area have good numbers of them, including Broughton where we did our Practical session.

I'd like to add my thanks to Pete et al for the event - thoroughly enjoyed it and it was great to put faces to avatars.

PBF was a lifer for me too and undoubtably the highlight so I also like to thank Denise for sending one in my direction to photograph.

I look forward to returning to the wood later in the year for the SPBF and PE's.

Cheers. Colin

I'd be pleased as punch with a photo like that, Denise. Nice to see the egg coloured up; it was white on Friday so I assume it was laid that day (perfect timing!). Now it's just the count down to the delivery .....

Between the showers this morning I had another go at the egg.
I have made a cardboard box diffuser but it's a bit rubbish.
Dull conditions, on a tripod with flash (diffused) Manual focus and timer. (Maurice would be pleased with me. To lift the stem slightly I used a length of card and two red plastic cloths pegs! )
It's better, but not the best yet.
I will keep at it as and when I can.
(hubby getting quite cross with me now, I need to do some jobs )
Denise

I would like to echo all the comments that have been made about this most successful and enjoyable day, a special thanks to the organisers and members of the Hampshire and I.O.W. branch. Well done
It was great to meet everyone and put faces to names, hope we can all meet up again,

Warm Regards
Paul (romansnumber7)

Pete Eeles wrote:

Bill S wrote:If anyone can remember Roger Buchanan's quick technique for colour balance please could you PM the what he did.

I've just emailed Roger to ask for a written explanation - which I'll post once I receive it. I don't believe Roger covered this due to lack of time.

Cheers,

- Pete

Here's Roger's response:

White balance correction in Adobe Photoshop.

Create a second duplicate layer - this process is 'destructive' as described here - i.e. it alters the layer you are working on and it is much easier to discard an altered layer than reload the file from disc - it can work in adjustment layers as a non-destructive process but this assumes you know how to create such layers.

Image>adjustments>Curves (or Command M on a Mac) - opens Curves dialogues box.

There are three 'eye-dropper' tools below the curve graph - the left hand of the three is for the Black point, Middle for mid-grey (NOT 18% grey), and the right-hand one is for the White-point.

Double-click the black dropper - this brings up another dialogue box with a colour palette and tables of values. On the right, the lower group of three is for the R G and B channels - set each of these to 10 (the default is 0) - highlight the 0 or erase it and type in 10. The colour chart 'circle will move up very slightly from the bottom to a marginally warmer and softer shade of black - guarantees that you never have a jet-black in your print. Click OK

Double-click the mid-grey and set the values in R G B to 133 - click OK

Double-click the white-point dropper and set values to 244 - click OK. This guarantees you never print 'nothing' - i.e. pure base paper white - this avoids glossy papers appearing to have blank areas of shine when viewed using a good light - by printing a minute amount of very very pale grey, there will be enough ink to ensure you have an even appearance to your print.

Now choose what you want as pure white in your image - click once on the white-dropper and then move your cursor to the point on your image that you want to be white - as you do so, the pointer becomes an eye-dropper - the choice point is the very end of the dropper and the default is a single pixel - this can be changed but that is another answer (!). Click once with the eye-dropper on 'your' chosen white point - if there is a colour cast, you will see an immediate effect.

Now select the black-point dropper and do the same thing with your chosen black point. Again, there is often another change but it is generally more subtle.

Now for the difficult bit - it must come last - select the mid-grey - this is very much an optional extra as it may be VERY difficult to decide what is mid-grey - if you are already happy with the result of white and black - miss this out - if not, try for a mid-grey point - i.e. halfway between deepest black and purest white. Experiment. If you do not like the result, delete this layer and start again or just click cancel, your base layer is unchanged.

These changes can increase saturation of some colours and you need to ensure that if you are working at the very limit of the saturation you can print, switch on the gamut warning to check that you are not out-of-range for your printer and working colour-space - this warning is 'third-down' in your Photoshop View menu and is a revelation if you are unhappy that rich colours on your monitor do not translate into equally rich colours on your printer - monitors will display much richer and more saturated colours than most desk-top printers can print.

Cheers,

- Pete

Denise wrote:Between the showers this morning I had another go at the egg.
I have made a cardboard box diffuser but it's a bit rubbish.
Dull conditions, on a tripod with flash (diffused) Manual focus and timer.

OT edit (Small).JPG

(Maurice would be pleased with me. To lift the stem slightly I used a length of card and two red plastic cloths pegs! )
It's better, but not the best yet.
I will keep at it as and when I can.
(hubby getting quite cross with me now, I need to do some jobs )
Denise

Looking good, Denise!

I forgot to mention - I also use a bunch of extension tubes with my 105mm macro

To be honest, I'm of the opinion that "super macro" photography is an art unto itself and, when I retire, I could really "get into" this area - but for now, it's just too darn time-consuming to get good shots!

Cheers,

- Pete

For comparison - here's a shot of a Duke of Burgundy egg, taken today. As you'll see, it's relatively-poor - but the best I could manage! Also a pic of the daddy

Cheers,

- Pete

Pete Eeles wrote: Here's Roger's response:

Thanks for this Pete, and if you can, please pass on thanks to Roger.

Bill

Pete Eeles wrote:For comparison - here's a shot of a Duke of Burgundy egg, taken today. As you'll see, it's relatively-poor - but the best I could manage! Also a pic of the daddy

Cheers,

- Pete
]

Relatively-poor ??? Some people are born with it, and some people strive trying to achive this standard! You are in the first group and I am in the second.
Denise

DOB,