Post your insects

I have these in another post..but Geoff and Peter :) you guys seem to be the pros here..so im putting my images here and if ya could help with naming them? i"m nw to all of this so...why not go deeper into it :) here they are..hope they ok :(

#1
http://i41.tinypic.com/2diehpf.jpg
#2
http://i39.tinypic.com/oqlraq.jpg
#3 Is this some sort of Bumblebee? Seems really happy to have latched onto this flower..almost looks liek its grinning :)
http://i40.tinypic.com/b6zq7o.jpg

Here's another one...not sure what it is... seems like fly head and some sorta be body????

http://i43.tinypic.com/20kvuis.jpg

Peter, your butterfly is a Brimstone. Note the hooked shape of the wing tip. Not sure if you get any variations to the standard model where you are.

Claudio. Bees are never easy subjects so you are doing well.

It is a matter of taste but I tend to regard insect, or flower, photos as portraits; so I try to crop out as much of the distracting or poorly exposed backgrounds as possible. Not excessively tight though, particularly when there are well focused elements which help to tell the full story.

You sometimes have to decide what is the main intended subject.

I often do a bit of selective editing with layers and masks to apply effects just to particular areas.

The first two images are bees of some form. Note the long 'elbowed' antennae which is typical of that family.

Not sure about the third creature; certainly something which we don't see in the UK.

There are some flies, like the sawfly family for instance, which do have longer antennae.

The last one is definitely some form of fly, but not one which I have encountered.

That is one of the problems with insect photography. Besides the camera, lens, tripod, lighting, etc, there are all those expensive identification books! :eek:

Claudio, just PM-ed you and nice photos by the way. Great detail and lighting.

I'd just like to really thank both Geoff and Peter on there great advice, it trully is appreciated, I hope to put down better and better images every time I post here.. And with your help I can only get better and better.. Thank you!!

Vertical landing.

http://i44.tinypic.com/2ibng9h.jpg

Epistrophe grossulariae a species of hoverfly.

And another hoverfly - Syritta pipiens.

http://i44.tinypic.com/21d4xvp.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Letrow

One of my earlier attempts at macro, shot with the Ricoh GX200
Although the macro option is quite useful the DOF is terrible compared to what I can do with the Nikon D7000 and the 105mm macro lens. There is TOO MUCH detail in the background.
But I did like the Ricoh at the time (and it is lightweight of course compared to the Nikon):(. Nowadays I would only use it for non-macro photographs I think.

---

I would suggest that the problem is less the depth iof field but rather the relative brightness and could easilly be put out of focus by duplicating the image, blurring the top version and then erasing the top layer where you want sharpness. Having done that and toned down the background brightness [ and added a tip to the wing :) increased canvas size to make room for it] I think you have quite a nice shot.
Not sure about the purple blossom but becuase it was directly under the butterfly I felt it needed to be sharp but darkened slightly.http://i41.tinypic.com/562hk.jpg
finally replaced photo with another version where I partly eerased the blurred layer aacross the bottom to get a suggestion of sharpness back into the shot ... before it seemed 'sureal' [?] hanging there with no support?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcuknz

I would suggest that the problem is less the depth iof field but rather the relative brightness and could easilly be put out of focus by duplicating the image, blurring the top version and then erasing the top layer where you want sharpness. Having done that and toned down the background brightness [ and added a tip to the wing :) increased canvas size to make room for it] I think you have quite a nice shot.
Not sure about the purple blossom but becuase it was directly under the butterfly I felt it needed to be sharp but darkened slightly.
finally replaced photo with another version where I partly eerased the blurred layer aacross the bottom to get a suggestion of sharpness back into the shot ... before it seemed 'sureal' [?] hanging there with no support?

---

The problem I have with this nowadays, being spoiled by more resolution is the level of detail I see. The shot in itself is ok, but now that I have the D600 it doesn't make sense to me to do macro with the GX200.
I still use the camera now and then and in good light it performs fine. ISO can't go high though, so in comparison with the D600 it has its limitations.

old bumblebee

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7304/9...54929646_b.jpg

Heres some type of hover bee? I think?? :) Again


http://i44.tinypic.com/yys9l.jpg

Not sure what species you get there, Claudio, but this looks like one of our UK Episyrphus balteatus hoverflies.

Something slightly different, a Cranefly.

http://i44.tinypic.com/1109nh3.jpg

Possibly Tipula fulvipennis. I have been seeing the odd one of these flitting around for the past two weeks but they have been too nervous so I couldn't get close enough for a photo. This was from around 3 ft but I struggled to get a reasonable camera angle.

Nice details Geoff and difficult to get close to, without losing parts of it, as he is quite big.

When possible, Peter, I like to get an overall scene shot like this then move in closer to shoot the areas needed for identification.

But luckily, I seem to have managed just enough detail here for a probably name.

Plenty of those common craneflies around everywhere now but it is always nice to find one of the more interesting species. There are a surprising number of cranefly species; and many of them are virtually identical so correct identification is never easy.

Saddle Bags

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3734/9...4fe0b05b55.jpg

This one was looking me in the eye. I'm told that oval opening on it's left foreleg is it's ear. Who knew?

http://i41.tinypic.com/dn0ro5.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff F

When possible, Peter, I like to get an overall scene shot like this then move in closer to shoot the areas needed for identification.

---

Great advice Geoff...defintitely going to apply this to my work from now on...Geoff and Perter,may I ask , what is the limit to your cropping of images? And also...in the beginning..did you also stuggle with underexposed images? I'm really strugglinng with that.

Claudio

These are a tad over enlarged I suspect (or suffering from camera shake). Either that or I have been looking at them too long. They are sharp (...ish) but not crisp.

A couple of Speckled Wood Butterflies as near as I can identify them.

Both with the Nikon 7100 and the Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro. ISO 200


1/200th Sec @f8 hand held
http://i41.tinypic.com/2ah5lvm.jpg

1/125th sec @ f9 hand held
http://i42.tinypic.com/auyx40.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mammarazzi

Saddle Bags

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3734/9...4fe0b05b55.jpg

---

Given that it's a mystery how they fly anyway............. Nice shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ga6742

This one was looking me in the eye. I'm told that oval opening on it's left foreleg is it's ear. Who knew?

http://i41.tinypic.com/dn0ro5.jpg

---

This is quite an image. What is it?