Poison frog for critique!

[AdamStuckert]

Hi all,

This is an individual Ranitomeya fantastica from Peru, shot in situ.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5040/7081857317_23b5ba7ae2_c.jpg

Handheld, frog on the buttress of a tree.
Nikon D3100, Nikkor 85mm macro, Sigma EF-610 flash
ISO 400
f/20
1/200s
Flash on, manual

I have a few minor complaints about this shot. The first is that the focus is a tad soft on the upper eye and the second is that the buttress is a tad bit brighter than I'd like, but I haven't bothered to correct that.

In fact, this is actually what this frog looks like. If anything, the orange on the head is a bit washed out compared to how it actually is. The only manipulations I made were to crop and add a signature.

I'm looking forward to your critiques and comments.

Cheers,
Adam


<iframe width="468" scrolling="no" height="60" frameborder="0" style="border:none;" border="0" src="http://mer54715.datafeedfile.com/widget/aff_widget_prdt_generate-2.0.php?aff_num=10536&aff_net=1&widget_num=2685" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0"><p>Your browser does not support iFrame.</p></iframe>

[Andrew McLachlan]

Hi Adam,

This is a real beauty of a specimen. Ranitomeyas are not easy to photograph due to there very active nature so I think you have done quite well with this one. The focus looks fine to me. I would like to see a bit more room in front of the frog...not sure if you have it...you mentioned that you cropped the image so maybe. If this were mine I would evict all the flash generated spectral highlights from the frog's legs and the one just above the catchlight in the frog's eye. I have often found it easiest to zoom in to about 500-600% when evicting such highlights. Very nice capture!

[Jonathan Ashton]

I guess this is a very small frog and so you had to go in very close. I find amphibians very difficult to get right, normally I am driven to get a good sized image in the frame and then I come a cropper because there is not quite enough DOF, so then I ask myself what is the most important aspect and does it really matter if all the subject is not in focus.
The rear end is out of focus but I think that is OK but what does bother me a little is the light, or lack of it, on the lower back, my eye keeps being drawn to that area yet the most important aspect is the head and flank. I would have darkened the background a little, I think that also - as you indicate tends to draw the eye.
Having said that I really like the detail you have in the head and thoracic region and you have excellent exposure there. I think this is a tricky shot on that particular background and just a few minor tweeks would help improve it. This sounds perhaps a little critical but I think you have a good shot there.

[Steve Maxson]

Hi Adam and welcome to the Macro forum! This is a beautiful frog! You already have some excellent comments above from Andrew and Jon to consider. In addition, I would suggest trying to open up the hard shadow a little - if you are shooting RAW files and using Photoshop to convert them, you can lower the "Blacks" slider and increase the "Fill Light" slider (I'm using CS5) to soften the shadows. A diffuser on your flash will also help to soften the shadows (if you're not already using one). I would also suggest running a round of NR on the dark background at the top of the frame. You are starting with a strong image and a few tweaks will make it even better! :S3: Keep them coming!

[AdamStuckert]

Hi all,

Thanks for taking the time to respond and provide helpful criticism. Since I'm a bit new to all of this, I'll ask a few questions/make a few comments (in no particular order).

1. What do you mean when you said to 'evict' the highlights? I ended up cloning them out.
2. I recropped to give a bit more space in front of the frog, it was a good idea.
3. I do shoot in RAW but I only have photoshop elements 9 which does not recognize Nikon's raw files. I did try to lighten the shadows, but it looked very unnatural to me.
4. Does NR = noise reduction? I applied that as well.
5. I don't use a diffuser, I bought a flash primarily for birds but found it works well for the frogs too with the exception of the harsh shadows. There is a drop down portion built in to the flash which helps diffuse the flash and I do use that though. I'm not sure what results I'd get with a diffuser.
6. I've put up the image with edits....I'm toying with darkening the background further.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8354/8289557038_4290b9a6d5_c.jpg

Thanks,
Adam

[Andrew McLachlan]

Hi Adam,

I like the repost with the additional room in front of the frog and by evict I did mean to clone the highlights out. You have done well with cloning the ones you have so far. I would clone out the remaining ones, but that is in part a personal choice. If you choose to clone out all the highlights don't forget the ones on the tips of the toes.:S3:

For my frog photography I either use natural light or a flash. Due to the active nature of some species flash is often the way to go, but the wet, glossy skin will yield many flashed highlights.

Lovely frog and capture once again.

[Jonathan Ashton]

I like your repost, on examination it is probably because there is less contrast between the subject and background. Diffusers come in a variety of guises, I use a Stofen Omnibounce - very cheap and it produces remarkably even lighting, it is small and just fits over the head of the gun. There are other larger diffusers but I prefer the portability of the small one. Regarding compatibility with Elements, over here in UK - and on Amazon version 11n is available for half price - a terrific bargain.
Again I still recommend lowering the background brightness, if it could be more like the foreground the frog would "pop" or stand out more effectively.

[Dave Johnson]

Hi Adam, what a gorgeous subject. Super detail captured for a hand held shot! The re-post is a definite improvement but I'd remove the high light on the frog's left leg as it really pulls my eye. Background area in front of the frog's face is a touch bright but not a deal breaker for me. Well done.

Dave J.