After opinions here so be as cruel as you like (gently though ).
This little Smooth Newt is between 1 to 1.5 inches head to tail, as was attempting to photograph it I knew I was going to have a lot of the creature out of focus so thought to myself if that is the case then why not try and maximise it and opened the lens all the way to 3.5....
Really would appreciate your thoughts and opinions here...
I don't dislike the image; just wondering if the juxtaposition of sharp and soft is a little too much - does the 'fight' between the what is in and out of focus over-power the subject? Did you shoot it at around f8?
Nice idea that definitely does work with larger subjects.
Cheers,
Chris
Posted by Brian Davis on April 17, 2009 at 4:43 AM
Pretty wierd, and unusual on here. I like it though. Did you take any with a different DOF?
Not sure it'll be to everyones taste.
First of all Phil, the subjest is gorgeous, where do you find all these herps! I'm well jealous. With regards the mush, I personally think it's too much. I don't mind the surroundings to be mushy but I would have liked to see at least the front leg and more of the back in focus. Composition and exposure are spot-on as usual.
A great subject and a nice idea, but I also think the mush is a little too much. It almost looks like a Photoshop effect and so looks a little OTT. Maybe about f6.3 would be optimal here?
I actually quite like this. You've managed to isolate the important parts of the subject from what looks like what would otherwise be a distracting, unattractive fore- and back-ground of earth, but managed to keep the complimentary colour of this. I'd be tempted to add a very slight blur to the tip of the elbow, just so it's not in as much focus as the head. I think any significant increase in DoF (f8+) would change the feel of the image and bring in the uninteresting surroundings.
Posted by John Robinson on April 17, 2009 at 8:19 AM
I like this. It's different and works well for me.
JohnR
Posted by Dave Bartlett on April 17, 2009 at 8:23 AM
I like it too Phil. It almost creates a feeling of peering secretly through something to the animal. Image itself spot on of course.
Dave
Posted by eric weight on April 17, 2009 at 2:31 PM
Impeccably executed as always, but I am afraid that it just doesn't work like this for me. The DoF is just so thin that it looks like a slice of detail stuck onto an Oof image. I take my hat off to anybody who can get such a thin Dof in the right place by handholding, but there is too much 'mush' for me.
I feel guilty writing that because your images are always so good, but you did ask and it is really a matter of opinion anyway. (I hope that is gentle enough?) Eric
The plain of focus is perfect just where it needs to be,everybody goes for as much DOF as possible with macro but I think this works very well,there have been some great orchid shots on wild wonders of europe using lenses wide open and to great effect,well executed!!!!
Hi Phil,
I very much like the absolute minimal depth of field approach in this image. The creatures face is nice and sharp and contrasts very well with the surroundings.
Discussion
15 repliesISO400, 1/250 @ f3.5
ACR5, resize & sharpen CS4
Hi
After opinions here so be as cruel as you like (gently though
This little Smooth Newt is between 1 to 1.5 inches head to tail, as was attempting to photograph it I knew I was going to have a lot of the creature out of focus so thought to myself if that is the case then why not try and maximise it and opened the lens all the way to 3.5....
Really would appreciate your thoughts and opinions here...
All the best
Phil
Phil.
I don't dislike the image; just wondering if the juxtaposition of sharp and soft is a little too much - does the 'fight' between the what is in and out of focus over-power the subject? Did you shoot it at around f8?
Nice idea that definitely does work with larger subjects.
Cheers,
Chris
Not sure it'll be to everyones taste.
Well done.
A great subject and a nice idea, but I also think the mush is a little too much. It almost looks like a Photoshop effect and so looks a little OTT. Maybe about f6.3 would be optimal here?
Matt
Greg
JohnR
Dave
I feel guilty writing that because your images are always so good, but you did ask and it is really a matter of opinion anyway. (I hope that is gentle enough?)
Craig
www.craigchurchill.co.uk
I very much like the absolute minimal depth of field approach in this image. The creatures face is nice and sharp and contrasts very well with the surroundings.
i love it phil. not seeming too popular scanning the comments, but i really think this is very national geographic a la profesional.
superb stuff. do more of it.
mark.