Butterfly Meeetup

[Kent Wilson]

This photo was taken at teh Chicago Botanic Gardens in their Butterfly exhibit. Camera was a Canon 5DMIII; lens 70-200 f/4 at 116 mm. I may have had a 12mm extension tube attached. Exposure was 1/500@f/5.6, ISO 400, Exp Comp +2/3.

Post processing used Topaz Detail, Clarity and Adjust; used Nik Color Efex for vignette and borders.

Criticism appreciated. Compliment also.

Thanks

[Jonathan Ashton]

Kent I like the colours and composition but the image is not sharp, I don't know if this is a processing error?
For what it is worth when I use Topaz detail it is on minimal settings.
Is the original image pin sharp - what does it look like using Photoshop only??

[Arthur Morris]

Interesting butterflies and colors and patterns but as above, it is not sharp. Can you post the original catpure as a JPEG so that we can try to figure out what is going on?

[Mitch Haimov]

This would be an excellent image if sharp. Everything else works very well, although I would suggest masking some of your Topaz work from the OOF leaves--seems to be accentuating noise.

[gary ellwein]

Love the comp. and high key effect. Hopefully suggestions above increase the sharpness.

[Kent Wilson]

Interesting butterflies and colors and patterns but as above, it is not sharp. Can you post the original capture as a JPEG so that we can try to figure out what is going on?

I have posted a jpg of the RAw file. I apologize wasting your time for having submitted this image: it is not in focus. Only excuse is a couple of eye surgeries including for detached retinas and cataracts; now one eye works for distance and the other for medium distance, and glasses for close, but not real well.

No tripod allowed where photo was taken, and I seem to have problems using the 70-200 f/4 IS with extension tubes, Should have used Live View or trusted Autofocus.

Once again, you have been generous to me. and I regret having submitted an image that is not in focus.

[Steve Maxson]

Hi Kent. The reposted RAW file looks much better to me than the original image - I think some of the issues have to do with the post processing. I like the juxtaposition of the 2 butterflies - too bad the head of the larger one was outside your DOF, but otherwise the image looks reasonably sharp to my eye. If the larger butterfly's body had been perpendicular to you, rather than turned slightly away, you would have had a real winner!

[Arthur Morris]

I have posted a jpg of the RAw file. I apologize wasting your time for having submitted this image: it is not in focus. Only excuse is a couple of eye surgeries including for detached retinas and cataracts; now one eye works for distance and the other for medium distance, and glasses for close, but not real well. No tripod allowed where photo was taken, and I seem to have problems using the 70-200 f/4 IS with extension tubes, Should have used Live View or trusted Autofocus. Once again, you have been generous to me. and I regret having submitted an image that is not in focus.

Hi Kent, Thanks for posting the original. As noted, it is much sharper than the originally posted image so I would agree with Steve when he says that you likely screwed it up in post :).

You should consider giving yourself a break. I applaud you for getting out and making images after several eye surgeries and for continuing to share the results. Rather than a "waste of time" i has provided a great learning/teaching experience for several of us.

I almost always rely on AF especially when hand holding. You might want to try the 100 macro IS. It has great AF as compared to the much heavier 180 macro that cannot focus on a checkerboard barn in the sun....

It looks as if focus were just past the butterfly on the right, the closest one. For the repost I sharpened that one, replace the single antenna with one from the other butterfly, made that longer with a transformed Quick Mask, and did some work with the clone stamp to make the head appear sharper....

Many folks would simply stay home and feel sorry for themselves. Great on you for getting out.

[Kent Wilson]

Thanks from my heart for the helpful and kind comments. I was pretty discouraged when I saw that the image was soft and that I didn't notice it myself.

I have told photographers in my camera clubs that this is the best website and the best photo bargain I know of. I like the honesty, the friendliness, and the helpful approach. I confess to not commenting on other's photos, but only because I feel so much the student rather than the teacher.

[Arthur Morris]

You are most welcome and thanks for your kind words. Commenting on the work of others is easy for anyone. Just say what you like and what you don't like. Try it; you might like it! Best.

[Mitch Haimov]

Hi, Kent. Don't let feeling like the student stop you from commenting! We are all students here--we post here to learn from constructive criticism; there are plenty of mutual admiration society websites out there but this is not one of them. Also, the process of distilling your reactions to other peoples' work down into words and expressing them is a valuable learning tool. Sure, you are doing it to help the originator of the thread but you will find that you learn from the process as well. Once you start verbalizing your reactions and suggestions (both what you like and what can be improved) I think you will find that you start to recognize ways to improve your own work of which you were not previously aware. As long as your reactions are sincere I, for one, would love to hear them--I would much rather have a thoughtful explanation of why one of my images is crap than an empty compliment!

[LinzRiverBalmer]

HI Kent,

I quite like this image even if parts are OOF and I will second everything Artie said.

I'm in the same boat, except my eyes work 20/20 with lots of sparks, lines, auras..... my biggest foe is tremors so burst mode is my friend.

The smaller butterfly is in focus enough with the leaves and such that it might be a neat image on its own if the file is big enough to crop with getting noisy, could also perhaps go the artsy route and blur the bigger butterfly more to make the focus on the smaller one and the bigger butterfly just there for Comp and texture.

Definitely not a waste of anyones time..... though I understand the feeling.

As for commenting, I'm as new as they get, though I grew up in a pre-press business staring at color and art all day, but I quite enjoy commenting here.