Drops and ripples..

[FeatherMonkey]

Posted a few of these elsewhere interested in what people think. Macro on dripping water.

1)IMG_7141

2)IMG_6994

3)IMG_6982

4)IMG_6965

5)IMG_6924

6)IMG_7138

[IzzieK]

Very artistic...Stef. You've been playing in the sink again... Haven't you been told off before... nevermind...

I like the combination of colour in these compositions...the last one looks better because of the clarity of the water in the center...

[Shadowman]

Nice concept, especially the splashes of color.

[bnnrcn]

I prefer to see the water clearer in those kind of shots, but I like #4 and #5 compositionaly

[FeatherMonkey]

Thanks Izzie and Binnur I do so struggle with clarity, sharp focus in these type of macro abstracts. For me it's less about the subject and more about the image.

I suspect you'll prefer this...
IMG_7108 where for me it does little. The clarity I think is partially down to the metal bowl and angle. I did nearly have a nice crown except for dof. I then got distracted by colours and whirls mixed with ufo's. I'll get back and aim for clarity and sharpness next time.

Thanks John the biscuit tin was reflecting had to keep shooting..

[Loose Canon]

A lot of things that could be said about these Stef. And a lot of things that might be irrelevant too!

This is not the easiest subject to shoot. Ironically, I just produced a studio shot myself that involved a drop/ripple element and was again reminded what it takes to get these shots.

From a personal standpoint I like these Stef. I’d like to know how you shot them, camera set-up, lighting, post-production, the whole ball of wax. I’m always curious how other folks go about shooting this.

In fact, now that you have mentioned what your approach with the shoot was (abstracts) a lot of what I would say is right on out the window!

But a couple of things to maybe watch for and just be aware of if you’re not already?

I like the lighting highlights in say, #3, #4 (especially), and #5. Long gradient highlights that accentuate the shape. Beautiful. In #6 and the last one, there are point speculars (spots) that I would feel are less desirable and not near as sexy looking!

I don’t do a lot of abstract work so I’ll assume focus is subjective in this case. But if you added grain to these in post it might be a little too much in a couple of these. If you didn’t you have a pretty good noise issue going on. And in almost all of them there are some errant streaks, spotting (different than the speculars) and in #5 looks like a couple of dirt specks on the water’s surface. The curse of studio work but fortunately an easy fix in post!

[bnnrcn]

Yes this one looks better to me Stef

Thanks Izzie and Binnur I do so struggle with clarity, sharp focus in these type of macro abstracts. For me it's less about the subject and more about the image.

I suspect you'll prefer this...
IMG_7108 where for me it does little. The clarity I think is partially down to the metal bowl and angle. I did nearly have a nice crown except for dof. I then got distracted by colours and whirls mixed with ufo's. I'll get back and aim for clarity and sharpness next time.

Thanks John the biscuit tin was reflecting had to keep shooting..

[FeatherMonkey]

A lot of things that could be said about these Stef. And a lot of things that might be irrelevant too!

This is not the easiest subject to shoot. Ironically, I just produced a studio shot myself that involved a drop/ripple element and was again reminded what it takes to get these shots.

From a personal standpoint I like these Stef. I’d like to know how you shot them, camera set-up, lighting, post-production, the whole ball of wax. I’m always curious how other folks go about shooting this.

In fact, now that you have mentioned what your approach with the shoot was (abstracts) a lot of what I would say is right on out the window!

But a couple of things to maybe watch for and just be aware of if you’re not already?

I like the lighting highlights in say, #3, #4 (especially), and #5. Long gradient highlights that accentuate the shape. Beautiful. In #6 and the last one, there are point speculars (spots) that I would feel are less desirable and not near as sexy looking!

I don’t do a lot of abstract work so I’ll assume focus is subjective in this case. But if you added grain to these in post it might be a little too much in a couple of these. If you didn’t you have a pretty good noise issue going on. And in almost all of them there are some errant streaks, spotting (different than the speculars) and in #5 looks like a couple of dirt specks on the water’s surface. The curse of studio work but fortunately an easy fix in post!

Hi Terry full exif is on Flickr...
Most should be
1/160(accidental lowering) 1/200
f6.3 ufo's f3.2
iso 400

Canon 600d

So set up really was a make do. Sandwich bag with hole, trapped in a amaretto biscuit tin at 12-1 o'clock, 430ex ii at 9 o'clock shooting from 6 o'clock. Speedlite on table not far from bowl just on it's feet, not diffused. Black foam board but don't think it contributed anything.

Now that noise, I'll look later but got a feeling very little done pp. Pushed levels, base - which is light sharpen and camera base curve. I was a little intrigued did notice but choose not to denoise. Think those years with film as a kid has made me immune to grain I think. So as far as I can remember was only really levels that pushed the tone, may of been slightly under, think I could of done with a little +flash compensation.(I'll check later). Been thinking recently I'm slowly getting to the point where I'm reaching the limits of my camera.

[Loose Canon]

Thank you for coming back with that set-up info Stef! Very interesting! Guess I should have tapped the file name links! A “duh” moment!

I wonder if your black card contributed to the nice shadow areas. Guess the only way to know for sure would be to do a couple of shots without it.

Everyone has a different tolerance for noise. As an example I have very little of it for the type of shooting I do most. Other stuff the tolerance is a bit more forgiving and a lot of it depends on the subject and how well it hides noise. Since the entirety of your frames are the same element (drop/ripple/large areas of smooth water), and not really broken up by other secondary elements I just found the noise to be more noticeable. But again, subjective. It may be that in abstract work noise/grain may be more acceptable still. I guess the important bit is that the photographer be aware of it and how to deal with it and have the choice to include it or not. I’m getting that you are fully aware of this, so cool!

As a side note a huge percentage of studio work is “make do”! I can’t even believe some of the Rube Goldberg (Heath Robinson- British equivalent) contraptions I have had to come up with to get the shot! Part of the fun!

[FeatherMonkey]

So had a look did also push some local contrast. Exposure is quite mixed had a little look at some that didn't get pp'd generally found auto just wanted to add 0.01ev but did want a lot more in blacks. Did see the odd one going to 1ev(is that 3 stops no idea not quite got my head into ev).

The blacks think I can answer the bowl is about 2 inches high most seem to be on the 9oclock under speedlite reckon it threw a little shadow. Though looking at ufo it seems to be on both sides whether that is the board or just ripple reflection not sure. The blacks aren't as evident before pp though.

Now I'm not sure why no denoise I think when I peep it's creamier but on a whole smoother.
2 denoised quite like them but not when I peep. So thanks Terry I'll go back over these.
IMG_6994

IMG_6965

Thanks and sorry Binnur I missed your reply. I promise to get back, I started off trying to get proper drop shots and I haven't mastered it yet.