Life On A Log

[LinzRiverBalmer]

Hopefully I got this up to par enough.

Someone here on this forum will have to name that fungus for me, I have no idea.

I can tell you they were each about the size of a dime on the big ones, a pencil eraser on the small.

disclosure, this was entered in my fair in 2012 and with bad lighting and a bad name scored a 79, one point shy of a merit, though I had it printed badly too.

This was so small I named it Fairyland Mezzinine, never listen to neighbors, they thought it looked like theater chairs for tiny forest fairies.

I did too.... the judges did NOT agree.

Taken in the fall in a state park that's part of Birmingham, Alabama.

late afternoon well within the shadows of the forest.

PP included auto levels correction and sharpening, contrast, small crop. This is about 95% FF.

Took it back into LR5 and brought up the black just a tad and added output sharpen on low.

Camera info

Sony Cybershot DSC HX 100V

1/80 at f/2.8
ISO 100

in camera low light multi exposure blend

hand held, no flash, manual macro focus

Please forgive my copyright for now, having program woes.

[Jonathan Ashton]

Liz this is probably a many zoned polypore fungus - you may have different common name in USA. The colours look pleasant though perhaps a little OTT, I sense an almost HDR effect. Perhaps that is the low light multi blend you refer to?? Horses for course and all that but my personal preference for natural history is to keep as close to nature as I can that doesn't mean I am right, it is just my preference. The exposure and sharpening looks good. Keep them coming!

[Mitch Haimov]

Well, I can tell you that these are bracket fungi, but as far as my ID skills will take me.

This is a nice scene, but it would work much better if everything were sharp IMHO. I would definitely recommend a tripod here and a much smaller aperture (higher f number). Barring a tripod, I would increase the ISO to the point that I could hand hold with a small aperture--you're better off dealing with noise in post than an OOF image. The fall leaves add interest, but I would have been tempted to pluck out the stray needles. Finally--and this may not have been possible--I would have tried to avoid clipping fungi.

[LinzRiverBalmer]

Thank you both.

Jonathan you have me stumped on abbreviation.... OTT???

as for the HDR, kind of, its an in camera setting meant to blend 3 shots for help with light, I've used it elsewhere to, its effective where there is sky.

i had tried a few with the flash but kept getting glare on the fungus.

when you say about keeping history natural, are you talking about the colors?? If so which ones??

the aqua colors were actually there, we were intrigued by them, my mother noticed them first, the aqua and green together, and some aqua colored moss patches too.

wondering if the colors developed because of the environment.... Next to a stream in a very humid place.

Some had broken off and those on the ground had that aqua type color at the base and they were very chalk like in texture.

Mitch thanks for all the suggestions. When you say everything in focus.... Including the leaves???

i left them to try to assimilate the size of the fungi but thought I didn't want them to be the focal point as they were so bright.

i will try a smaller aperture in the future. I'm never quite sure what will work on a macro shot taken at point blank range, I had the camera literally sitting on the edge of the log, not more than 2 inches from the fungi.

what would the smaller aperture in this instance achieved???

will have to look into a bendy leg tripod or something tiny for these situations.

[Jonathan Ashton]

Jonathan you have me stumped on abbreviation.... OTT??? OTT = Over the top in this case a little too saturated/pronounced.

as for the HDR, kind of, its an in camera setting meant to blend 3 shots for help with light, I've used it elsewhere to, its effective where there is sky.

i had tried a few with the flash but kept getting glare on the fungus.

when you say about keeping history natural, are you talking about the colors?? If so which ones??

the aqua colors were actually there, we were intrigued by them, my mother noticed them first, the aqua and green together, and some aqua colored moss patches too.

wondering if the colors developed because of the environment.... Next to a stream in a very humid place.

Some had broken off and those on the ground had that aqua type color at the base and they were very chalk like in texture.
When you use an automatic setting it sometimes works and sometimes it doesn't, the problem is you are not in full control of the process, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, if you use curves and or elective colour or saturation you can have more choice in the colour(s) you choose to emphasise. In general I personally do very little to colours, the most frequent thing I do is desaturate the yellow component of greens and sometimes desaturate the reds, It is rarely that I increase saturation. Having said that I do apply a little Clarity and Vibrance in the ACR conversion. I emphasise once again this is purely my choice I cannot say this is necessarily the correct thing to do it depends upon what you hope to achieve.

[Mitch Haimov]

Linz,

Glad to help when I can (hopefully you find the suggestions--both above and below--helpful!)

When you say everything in focus.... Including the leaves??? i left them to try to assimilate the size of the fungi but thought I didn't want them to be the focal point as they were so bright.
First, this is your art so it should be however you want it. My opinion is only that, and no more valid than yours. But I would be inclined to have the leaves sharp, although I was primarily concerned with the fungi nearer the top of the frame. To me the leaves don't daw the eye because they are bright (they aren't), they draw the eye because they are saturated. But you can certainly selectively reduce their saturation, as pointed out by Jon.

i will try a smaller aperture in the future. I'm never quite sure what will work on a macro shot taken at point blank range, I had the camera literally sitting on the edge of the log, not more than 2 inches from the fungi. what would the smaller aperture in this instance achieved???
Please don't just use a smaller aperture next time because someone in a forum said so. If you do not have a clear understanding of how aperture, shutter speed, and ISO combine to give you your overall exposure and just as importantly how each of those settings is an artistic choice that impacts the appearance of your images beyond simple the sense of "is the exposure appropriate?" then I very strongly urge you to master these things. Until you swear off the Program mode of your camera (or whatever Sony's fully automatic mode is called) you will not have control of your image quality. The camera cannot make these decisions for you because it does not know what you want. It only knows how to give you an average tonality equal to neutral gray (some cameras have some exceptions to that in certain situations, but they still don't know what you want creatively). Aperture priority and shutter priority are fine in some situations, primarily where things are changing quickly. But for the types of images you have been posting here you are liable to learn the most and get the best results if you take complete control and use manual mode--this will take a theoretical understanding of what the controls do and make it a real, practical understanding. Shutter speed is probably the most obvious--faster freezes motion and lets in less light, longer blurs motion and lets in more light. A lot of room for creativity there. A large aperture (small f number), such as you used in this image, results in shallow DOF and lets in a lot of light, a small aperture gives you more DOF and less light. How much DOF for a given aperture depends on magnification--the higher the magnification the lower the DOF, as you can see by comparing the DOF in extreme closeups in this forum (high magnification) to the DOF in grand landscapes (low magnification). High ISO makes the camera act as if it gives you more light* (while increasing noise) while low ISO gives you cleaner, less noisy images. Generally, you need decide which two of the three are most important to you, then adjust the third to get the proper exposure while the first two are where you want them--obviously this involves a trade off. Anyway, I'm sure you'll have no trouble finding much more detailed information on these subjects on the web. And I apologize in advance if I am explaining things you already know, but it appears from your questions they some of this may be unclear to you.

Anyway, my main point is this: Nothing can improve your photography more than mastering the use of aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. Not buying the best cameras, lenses, or gadgets; not traveling to exotic locations; nothing. And the only way to master these things is to learn the theory then practice until you can consistently predict the impact of adjusting each of them. A good way to practice is to set the camera on a tripod, then take multiple images of the same composition and with the same overall exposure but with different combinations of settings giving you that exposure. Then study the results and how they change with the settings. This is a much more affordable exercise now than it was in the days of film (and no need for manual record keeping)!

Have fun!

*Changing the ISO does not actually change the amount of light reaching the sensor, it changes the way the camera reacts to that light.

[LinzRiverBalmer]

thanks to all.....

all the input and suggestions are much appreciated.

Mitch I really appreciate your step by step on practicing.

Sounds silly I know, I do know this stuff, as in what it all does, I just don't know it by heart and have never practiced it.

I learned what it all is by my family and Pro Photo Father, but by his own admission he's horrible teacher.

Just picked up what I could, when it comes down to doing it I usually can't recreate because I wasn't shown how.

So for these shots I took close to 50 with different settings and finally got fed up and exhausted, turned the camera to the above posts mention settings and shot that way.

That's my problem in the moment I can't figure it out while out shooting, or remember what I read at home.

So I will use your instructs and start just practicing at home with something controlled.

[Mitch Haimov]

You're welcome, Linz. Great thing about practicing with digital is, although it takes time, effort, energy, you can do it anywhere, instant feedback, no processing, you don't need a great subject, and no one needs to see the results except you (unless you are seeking input regarding the results). I neglected to mention the importance of the quality of light in my prior post, but you seem to have a better handle on that.

[Steve Maxson]

Hi Linz. Lots of thoughtful, helpful comments by Mitch and Jon above - that's what BPN is all about! These are cool looking fungi - the green coloring on the fungi contrasts nicely with the red/orange of the leaves. When I look at the image, the things that first catch my eye are sharp - so I don't mind the fall off in sharpness elsewhere. Having said that, increasing the f/stop a little would help to sharpen up some of the softer areas. I like the even lighting and the diagonal comp is a plus. Overall, this is nicely done! Keep them coming!

[Sandy Witvoet]

Hey Linz... I really like this and don't think all the fungi need to be in focus. The red leaves somewhat draw your eye away.... but this would make a lovely print.

[LinzRiverBalmer]

Thanks again to all.

Sandy.... It looks better in print, its a really nice hallway piece especially in metallic.

thanks for input and compliment Steve .... I do think some of my sharpness is getting lost in my PP output in LR5, getting some input off ETL.

I've always sharpened first so getting out of the habit and figuring things out.

Mitch, again thank you for the help. Light is one thing I do ok with naturally.

[gary ellwein]

Linz, I find this to be an eye catching image. The best features are in the lower 2/3s of the frame. Consider cropping the top down to a point just below the bright red leaf. Hats off to Jonathan and Mitch for their in depth comments.

[Diane Miller]

I'm late to this -- I really like this image! On an iPhone and can't see detail well but I love the subject, composition and colors and the DOF works for me.

Excellent advice above! Practice is the secret to implementing understanding. I'd add to that to practice controlling the focus point, although I don't know the capabilities of your camera. (Not a criticism of this image, just an added thought to the above information.

Keep 'em coming!