beedraggled (for Bill)

[Katy Noelle]

After the rain. The light was extremely muted!

#1



#2



#3

[jiro]

Great shots, Katy. Are these shot with your new macro lens?

[Katy Noelle]

Thanks, Jiro! I run to the mailbox every day but nothing so far....

Thank goodness for those color sliders in Lightroom! but I'm still thinking that I need to just keep practicing and figuring it all out.

[ucci]

Good stuff, as per the expected usual from you, Ms Katy N
old ucci

[Donald]

Nice. I'm not sure about looking right down on top of (what?) - a buzzy thing - as in #2. But I do like the vibrancy of colour.

[Katy Noelle]

Thanks, Donald and Mr. K! I've had a hard time with #2 - getting the bee to stand out from the flower. i still really like the wings, though, and the color and structure of the flower and that's why I stuck it in the middle there.

[ktuli]

Katy,

Those are some beautifully crisp photos there. Thank you for the examples.

- Bill

[Katy Noelle]

Katy,

Those are some beautifully crisp photos there. Thank you for the examples.

- Bill

Oh, dear! I'm not really meaning them as examples - I have several personal "nit-picks" with them. They're really just "shares" as we're both working on globe thistles and bees. Do you really think that they're coming across as crisp?

[RockNGoalStar]

Perfect focus on all three... I really really want a macro lens...

[JohnC]

Lovely shots Katy-what enhances them too is the vibrant colour of the flower and because of the position of the bee in photo 2 that's the one I like best.

[Katy Noelle]

Thanks, Tommy and John! You have no idea how much the encouragement and good word helps!

[Sahil]

Very nice shots, Katy.
Great clarity & Colours.

[Katy Noelle]

Thanks, Sahil!

Hey! Hey...Dave Humphries....are you around? (I can see that you are...) If you have a chance, I'd love to know what you think, too. Am I getting closer? How do I get better?

[Letrow]

Great shots Katy, very good detail. Number 1 is the best for me. In the second shot the flower is too unsharp for my taste, the bee is nice though. Number 3, I don't know, the cropping is not ideal and the bee itself is a bit greenish and seems to have an extra edge at his/her rear on the black. The angle is nice in itself, as it is unusual, so maybe you can play around with that a bit.

[Katy Noelle]

Thanks, Peter! Those things are plain as day, now, that you mention them. I'm not tremendously attached to these photos; so, I think that I'll just take your advice and apply them to the next time I try.

[Dave Humphries]

Hey! Hey...Dave Humphries....are you around? (I can see that you are...) If you have a chance, I'd love to know what you think, too.

You rang, m'lady?

Well, I saw them and thought the first two I'd be very pleased with myself, they are perfectly sharp at the small 640 size posted here, are they bigger on Flickr?

The third, if I am brutal (sorry), if mine, I wouldn't have bothered with because the 'face' is partially obscured, but that's just my view.

#1 is definitely the strongest image, focus is spot on the antennae and head.

#2, yes the antennae and head are a bit merging with the bloom due to being of equal luminance, but the wings and body are fine.

The composition is great on all three.

Am I getting closer? How do I get better?

You're already there, especially if these would display at say 1000 square or 1200 on width for landscape ones.
You may have reached the limit of your equipment - what were they taken with btw? there is no EXIF data to see

You have caught the 'wet fur look' very well,

[Katy Noelle]

Great! Thanks, Dave, that's very helpful to know what you think! Just a quick reply, this evening, if you don't mind. The first one is NOT cropped with ISO200, the second is the same with a very mild crop in. They were taken with the 60mm and they were all around f5ish - I couldn't go any higher because of the muted light. I think that I can keep practicing and get better, though, with this lens - i see more that I could do to help it. I just need to focus and concentrate on what I'm doing. I find that I want to take all of my photos at the same distance - I don't know why. It's close up but, not often, truly macro. During this shoot, it occurred to me that I could attempt to get closer and/or try something different - well, every once in a while, at least.

btw, I'm never sure why there's no exif with my photos. It's not flickr taking them out, is it?

[Dave Humphries]

btw, I'm never sure why there's no exif with my photos. It's not flickr taking them out, is it?

Might be, or it could be related to how you are saving the jpg from say, CS5.

[Katy Noelle]

Might be, or it could be related to how you are saving the jpg from say, CS5.

Well, first I was taking it out of iphoto and, now, these are from newly acquired Lightroom. I'll check it out.

[Dave Humphries]

Well, first I was taking it out of iphoto and, now, these are from newly acquired Lightroom. I'll check it out.

If LR originated, are you using the Save For Web option? (in the past I have known that do this)
Try doing one just as Save As and make sure there isn't an innocuous checkbox somewhere that mentions EXIF or similar that is (or isn't) ticked as it should (or shouldn't) be.

Cheers,