Dragonfly Face

[Paul Gustafson]

This guy surprisingly sat still for me to shoot a few shots with a Canon 5D MkII, MP-E65:


http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17883832-lg.jpg

[Diane Miller]

Great detail on the compound eyes! I'm surprised you got so much DOF on the "nose" -- apologies for not knowing enough about insects to be able to use the correct term.

I don't know how much you want to manipulate tonalities, but for me the bright bluish OOF areas below the eyes compete a little. If it were me, I'd tone them down. But an amazing image anyway!

[Paul Gustafson]

Thanks. I'll bring that area down a little and repost.

Here is a description of the parts of the face:

http://www.brisbaneinsects.com/brisbane_dragons/DragonflyHead.htm

[Norm Dulak]

Hi Paul.

This is a very interesting image that I like very much. But please provide some technical information, including the lens used and your settings. Did you use an extension tube or a closeup diopter?

[Paul Gustafson]

Diane, I dropped the exposure on the oof body. How does that look?http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17885409-lg.jpg

[Jonathan Ashton]

I like the repost, and this is what I was referring to when I critiqued you other post. The detail is very good indeed and the subject stands out well from the background. In general I don't like black/very dark backgrounds but this one is not dominant. I would have preferred a brighter background, I think it would look more natural - purely because I am more accustomed to seeing them in daylight. Having said that I like the image very much indeed, well done.

[Paul Gustafson]

I like the repost, and this is what I was referring to when I critiqued you other post. The detail is very good indeed and the subject stands out well from the background. In general I don't like black/very dark backgrounds but this one is not dominant. I would have preferred a brighter background, I think it would look more natural - purely because I am more accustomed to seeing them in daylight. Having said that I like the image very much indeed, well done.

I understand. Many don't like the black background, I have no preference. I usually shoot bugs on manual, 1/200 sec, f16, ISO 100, flash set to ETTL so it sets the exposure. With the MP-E65 lens the depth of field is so shallow that only a very thin slice of the image is in focus, even at f16, and you have to stick the lens within a few inches of the subject to be in focus. Since my subjects are live and usually either crawling or being blown around in the breeze, and I hand hold to shoot and have my hand tremor and my own body swaying a bit, it takes a reasonably fast shutter speed to freeze the motion. With a fast shutter speed and the f-stop at f16 or higher the flash sets the exposure and only the subject is lit, background is usually jet black even when shooting on a bright day unless the bug is on a very light surface. If I shoot to show the background I need to open the aperture wide and very little of the subject would be in focus. It's a big issue with that particular lens. I shot a couple of pics the other day of some tiny basil flowers, some in program mode so the background isn't black and some on manual like I shot the dragonfly, I'll post them so you can see the difference in depth of field.

I find it's much less of an issue with the 100 f2.8L IS lens, maybe because subject distance is much, much greater. I suspect the minimum focus distance for the 100 is greater than the maximum focus distance for the MP-E65. With the 100 I can get either effect, will post a comparison of photos of a pitcher plant flower. Shot with the 100 on manual like the dragonfly:

http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17768732-md.jpg

[Paul Gustafson]

Shot with the 100 in Program mode (can't access the metadata from work):

http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17768721-md.jpg

[Paul Gustafson]

Aesthetically I like the pitcher plant photo with the background much more than the one with black background. But even with the 100 macro lens there is still a noticeable difference in depth of focus in favor of the manual shot. When I get home I'll post a the basil flower pics taken with the MP-E65 and the difference in depth of field is much more dramatic. Sorry to ramble on so much but you brought up something I struggle with each time I shoot.

[Diane Miller]

I like the RP on the dragonfly -- the face stands out better without competition from other light tones. But now I'm wondering if there is a little more detail to be brought out in the whites.

Anyone who can use that lens has my respect!

[Ron Conlon]

Paul, thanks for your discussion of the approaches you have taken with that lens versus a more typical macro. I too prefer the repost.

[Paul Gustafson]

I like the RP on the dragonfly -- the face stands out better without competition from other light tones. But now I'm wondering if there is a little more detail to be brought out in the whites.

Anyone who can use that lens has my respect!

I have another shot in which the hairs on the white portion of the face are in sharp focus (a little out of focus here) but the compound eyes are a little out of focus. Unfortunately he was moving his head around so the two shots aren't in the same position so I can't replace the oof area with the in focus area. If I were better with Photoshop, maybe...

[Steve Maxson]

Hi Paul. Very nice detail in the dragonfly's eyes! I like your repost - though you have also darkened the mandibles - this should be an easy tweak to brighten those up again. You don't mention what flash you are using - I think your images will be even better if you diffuse the flash effectively. There are some flash-generated spectral highlights on the dragonfly's face that could be eliminated with better diffusion. For this image, you might consider carefully cloning some of those.

As for the black background when using flash - I agree with most of your comments in pane #7 above. However there are a couple things you can try to achieve a non-black background once you have set SS and f/stop. 1). increase ISO and 2). set the flash on manual mode. Both of these will help to brighten up the background, but will require a lot of experimentation in the field and the "right" settings will vary as lighting and background conditions change. Unfortunately, I have done very little macro/flash photography in the field in the last couple years so I am way out of practice on this and I'm not the one to give you detailed solutions. My advice is to practice and experiment and things will begin to fall into place! :S3:

[Paul Gustafson]

Hi Paul. Very nice detail in the dragonfly's eyes! I like your repost - though you have also darkened the mandibles - this should be an easy tweak to brighten those up again. You don't mention what flash you are using - I think your images will be even better if you diffuse the flash effectively. There are some flash-generated spectral highlights on the dragonfly's face that could be eliminated with better diffusion. For this image, you might consider carefully cloning some of those.

As for the black background when using flash - I agree with most of your comments in pane #7 above. However there are a couple things you can try to achieve a non-black background once you have set SS and f/stop. 1). increase ISO and 2). set the flash on manual mode. Both of these will help to brighten up the background, but will require a lot of experimentation in the field and the "right" settings will vary as lighting and background conditions change. Unfortunately, I have done very little macro/flash photography in the field in the last couple years so I am way out of practice on this and I'm not the one to give you detailed solutions. My advice is to practice and experiment and things will begin to fall into place! :S3:

Thanks, appreciate the comments. I'm using the Canon Macro Twin Lite MT-24EX. I wasn't very careful when I darkened the background, I can do a much better job around the mandibles with a little care, will do and repost. Funny you should bring up a diffuser, I just received the Stoffen diffusers for the flash, I chose them because they don't block the modeling light and they don't protrude and prevent me from getting close enough to focus with the MP-E65 lens at 3-5x. Haven't had a chance to use them yet. I'll also pick up a set that protrudes but gives a much larger diffusion area and see how that works at lower mag. This was recommended:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-MT-24EX-Flash-Diffusers-/271650224894?

[Steve Maxson]

Thanks, appreciate the comments. I'm using the Canon Macro Twin Lite MT-24EX. I wasn't very careful when I darkened the background, I can do a much better job around the mandibles with a little care, will do and repost. Funny you should bring up a diffuser, I just received the Stoffen diffusers for the flash, I chose them because they don't block the modeling light and they don't protrude and prevent me from getting close enough to focus with the MP-E65 lens at 3-5x. Haven't had a chance to use them yet. I'll also pick up a set that protrudes but gives a much larger diffusion area and see how that works at lower mag. This was recommended:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-MT-24EX-Flash-Diffusers-/271650224894?

Paul - I also use the MT-24EX flash and have the Stoffen diffusers. My opinion (and that of others who have used them) is that they are not particularly effective for images of shiny-bodied invertebrates. For this type of macro work, a do-it-yourself diffuser seems to work best. And, there are about as many do-it-yourself designs as there are photographers who use them. :S3: You might find some useful ideas here: http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/2010/12/more-macro-rigs.html Ideally, you would want the twin flashes diffused to the point that you no longer see 2 catchlights in reflective areas of your subject, but rather one larger, soft "catchlight" that is not really noticeable as even being a catchlight. This all involves some trial and error, but once you get it right you should see marked improvement in your macro images!