I make no excuses for the similarities between this, Bretts and my previous upload of this butterfly, it was after all the same location with the same opportunities.
I read with interest the comments on Bretts image with regard to the size of the subject in the frame, here I deliberately went for more negative space framing the butterfly near to the top third, leaving space for the perch and possibly text if needed....
I do have a range of different images and compositions giving loads of choice....
Personally I prefer this one, Phil. Butterflies are small creatures (well, in the UK anyway), and although they look beautiful at well over natural size, they also look distinctly odd to me when blown up that much. I also like the way there is just a little bit of background here as well. The totally even backgrounds we have become used to seeing behind butterfly and dragonfly pictures remind me of the sort of shots that Sam Beaufoy was taking in the 1940s. He had an excuse - a plate camera, 8 asa film, and the necessity of taking all shots in the studio. Today it is possible to get your insects standing out from a natural background, yet still give some idea of what that habitat is like.
You have almost achieved that here, and in my opinion it is a better shot for it.
I have to agree Phil, I too prefer this and indeed 'my other shots of this species'.. But I figured I would do things differently just to show off the detail more than anything rather than the 'desired' comp that people want. But in terms of publication and general use photography, like you I have taken many images of different angles, exposures, BGs etc.. However, if I posted the desired composition every time I think I'd find myself getting quite predictable.. A bit like my snake 'portraits'!
I agree that the space and size of B'fly here are well suited for the purposes you describe and give the sense of scale to the image rather than the 'larger than life' I chose. I think next time I'm going for a full on, 'in your face butterfly shot', just to be different again..
This is a fine shot Phil and another that shows great composition, detail and colour. As usual..! I'm sure someone will tell you that the plant is now to dominant..! LOL!
Whilst Brett's image shows excellent detail (despite the lack of legs ) I think this shot better suits the subject. The use of negative space and the position on the top of the "perch" gives a better sense of the size and delicate appearance of butterfly.
You don't mention in your techs wether fill flash was used but it looks as though it may have been with lovely detail and colour even in shadow areas.
I agree with the above, an excellent shot with great comp and bg! Nice to see two shots of these that are very different, but achieve what the photographers intended.
comparing this shot to Brett's I think my conclusion is that they are both excellent shots. There are times when I do like to see insects a bit larger in the frame because it's great to see the detail in their wings, eyes etc. However, insects a bit smaller in the frame can provide more elegant compositions and hence can be more attractive pictorially. I don't think we should choose between them, they are both excellent shots of a very attractive butterfly.
To take this to extremes, the other day I photographed a nice freshly emerged Large White. I started off with my Sigma 150 taking natural light shots with the butterfly nicely perched on a grass stalk and fairy small in the frame. I then starting taking extreme close-ups of its head using my MP-E 65 at 3x and 4x magnification using full flash. I find it interesting to see such different shots of the same insect, but personally find both types of shots appealing.
Not meant to be a battle between the two but an illustration of two different approaches to a very similar subject.
Chris... No flash used shooting in the shade on a very bright day gave rise to soft even illumination...
Ray... The light is 100% natural, This Butterfly was in the woodland shade which gave rise to low, but diffuse light, also had the benifit that it took longer for it to become active as it remained cooler...
I cannot express a personal preference because both of yours, and Brett's are all of an excellent standard.
It's great to see detail, which has been achieved in all images. Comp too is a tricky one, and I am sure there must be something in amongst them to please everyone.
Discussion
13 repliesISO640, 1/15 @ f11
ACR5.3 + resize & sharpen CS4
Full frame.
Hi,
I make no excuses for the similarities between this, Bretts and my previous upload of this butterfly, it was after all the same location with the same opportunities.
I read with interest the comments on Bretts image with regard to the size of the subject in the frame, here I deliberately went for more negative space framing the butterfly near to the top third, leaving space for the perch and possibly text if needed....
I do have a range of different images and compositions giving loads of choice....
All the best
Phil
You have almost achieved that here, and in my opinion it is a better shot for it.
David
I agree that the space and size of B'fly here are well suited for the purposes you describe and give the sense of scale to the image rather than the 'larger than life' I chose. I think next time I'm going for a full on, 'in your face butterfly shot', just to be different again..
This is a fine shot Phil and another that shows great composition, detail and colour. As usual..!
Look forward to catching up at the weekend.
Brett
You don't mention in your techs wether fill flash was used but it looks as though it may have been with lovely detail and colour even in shadow areas.
Hi Phil,
I agree with the above, an excellent shot with great comp and bg! Nice to see two shots of these that are very different, but achieve what the photographers intended.
Lewis.
To take this to extremes, the other day I photographed a nice freshly emerged Large White. I started off with my Sigma 150 taking natural light shots with the butterfly nicely perched on a grass stalk and fairy small in the frame. I then starting taking extreme close-ups of its head using my MP-E 65 at 3x and 4x magnification using full flash. I find it interesting to see such different shots of the same insect, but personally find both types of shots appealing.
Matt
Not meant to be a battle between the two but an illustration of two different approaches to a very similar subject.
Chris... No flash used shooting in the shade on a very bright day gave rise to soft even illumination...
Ray... The light is 100% natural, This Butterfly was in the woodland shade which gave rise to low, but diffuse light, also had the benifit that it took longer for it to become active as it remained cooler...
Cheers for the comments
I suppose the only way to improve is to find more exotic perches/behaviour/different lighting, you could go on forever!
I cannot express a personal preference because both of yours, and Brett's are all of an excellent standard.
It's great to see detail, which has been achieved in all images. Comp too is a tricky one, and I am sure there must be something in amongst them to please everyone.
Me....I love 'em all
Fran