2019 P52 - 2nd Qtr - Sandy(Skitterbug)

[skitterbug]

Week 16 - I'm still working with the lens/extender to get the DOF figured out. This young garter snake seems to like our waterfall feature and I saw him busy hunting for bugs or maybe even the frogs - if he has the chance. While I don't like being startled by garter snakes, I don't mind a few being in our yard.

Keeping in mind that I've been short changing myself on DOF, I stopped down the AF as Manfred and Geoff suggested. The lens/extender combination starts at f/8 so it isn't ideal for less light situations.

It was a pleasant day when I was out "hunting creatures" so I used the following settings: f/13 - 1/800 - ISO1000 (using auto settings for ISO).

Hopefully this image is improved. Comments welcome.

Before edit




After edit

Gartner Snake hunting for food

[Shadowman]

I like the cropped version.

[Geoff F]

Difficult subject which has worked well.

Just one thought; did you consider cropping to 4 x 5 ratio instead of 5 x 4 so as to reduce the size of that rather 'heavy' looking stone on the left?

[Tri Danimal]

Keeping in mind that I've been short changing myself on DOF, I stopped down the AF as Manfred and Geoff suggested. The lens/extender combination starts at f/8 so it isn't ideal for less light situations.

I like the cropped version as well.

I need to remember this. I have a nasty habit of trying to shoot everything at wide open, I don't know why but it always the last thing I check.

[skitterbug]

I like the cropped version as well.

I need to remember this. I have a nasty habit of trying to shoot everything at wide open, I don't know why but it always the last thing I check.

Hi Daniel - I fiddle with manual settings to make myself learn about what happens when I change a setting? I have been using f/8, which is wide open with this Lens/EX combination because I wanted the background not to be prominent and to help keep the ISO number from increasing, not realizing that I was also slightly off even with the the bullfrog's face. I also tried taking pictures in too dark of a situation.

I think I will have better results with brighter conditions so I can stop down the aperture without worry about ISO or speed. I need lots of practice but I am pleased with the progress I've made. My trials and errors remind me of the old film "The Wizard of Oz" where Dorothy takes one step forward and then two steps back......

Thanks for your comments!

[skitterbug]

I like the cropped version.

Thanks John!

[skitterbug]

Difficult subject which has worked well.

Just one thought; did you consider cropping to 4 x 5 ratio instead of 5 x 4 so as to reduce the size of that rather 'heavy' looking stone on the left?

Hi Geoff - Changing the aperture helped, I think and I'll keep that in mind when I am out with the combo lens/ex.

I hadn't considered the 4x5 crop but decided to give it a try and I like it as well. I didn't want the garter snake smack dab in the middle so that was one reason why I cropped the original the way I did. But I find that I can be satisfied with this crop too. Thanks for the suggestion!

[Cantab]

Difficult subject which has worked well.

Just one thought; did you consider cropping to 4 x 5 ratio instead of 5 x 4 so as to reduce the size of that rather 'heavy' looking stone on the left?

Sandy, I also like your edited version. But, I'm curious about Geoff's suggestion of using a portrait rather than a landscape orientation.

Your use of f13 with this lens combination seems to work. Have you used the DOF calculator on CiC with the appropriate focal length (presumably 400x1.4 on a crop sensor camera)? It presumably would give you some suggestions about what the usable DOF is at various distances between the camera and the subject of the photo.

I'm following your experiments with interest. I have the Mk1 version of your Canon telephoto, as well as the Mk3 version of the 1.4 extender, all on a 60D Canon. Autofocus is problematic but I believe is better on your 7Dii.

[Manfred M]

Hi Geoff - Changing the aperture helped, I think and I'll keep that in mind when I am out with the combo lens/ex.

I hadn't considered the 4x5 crop but decided to give it a try and I like it as well. I didn't want the garter snake smack dab in the middle so that was one reason why I cropped the original the way I did. But I find that I can be satisfied with this crop too. Thanks for the suggestion!

This crop works a lot better for me Sandy. The emphasis is now on the snake and it is situated and framed by the surrounding rocks. In general closer is better and the vertical orientation fits well with how the snake is positioned, but I think you can be even more aggressive in your crop to remove some of the bright areas in the top right hand corner by going to a square format.

The preset formats do matter when you are printing and are constrained by paper or frame sizes. When shooting for posting on the internet, those "rules" should not constrain you.

[skitterbug]

Sandy, I also like your edited version. But, I'm curious about Geoff's suggestion of using a portrait rather than a landscape orientation.

Your use of f13 with this lens combination seems to work. Have you used the DOF calculator on CiC with the appropriate focal length (presumably 400x1.4 on a crop sensor camera)? It presumably would give you some suggestions about what the usable DOF is at various distances between the camera and the subject of the photo.

I'm following your experiments with interest. I have the Mk1 version of your Canon telephoto, as well as the Mk3 version of the 1.4 extender, all on a 60D Canon. Autofocus is problematic but I believe is better on your 7Dii.

Hi Bruce - I think Geoff wanted to see less rock on the left side of the photo. If I wanted to print this, I'm not sure which crop I'd use. I like rocks a lot but this photo is about the garter snake.... It is difficult for me to choose which crop pleases me more. LOL

You should laugh at me because I am a complete klutz with math, calculations, etc. I've looked at the DOF calculator but it's never made sense to me........ <sad I know> I have to "see" results to understand...

I plan on working with my combo lens/ex since I have high hopes of closer more detailed photos of wildlife but I want sharp results. Hopefully, I don't become disgusted with the extender and toss it into a drawer. Autofocus can be a bit slow when the lens is fully extended. Sometimes I have to back off to get it to activate and then go back to a full zoom for my capture. In lightning fast situations, I have a feeling I may be a bit frustrated. But we shall see since it is all an experimentation for me!

Thanks for commenting!

[skitterbug]

This crop works a lot better for me Sandy. The emphasis is now on the snake and it is situated and framed by the surrounding rocks. In general closer is better and the vertical orientation fits well with how the snake is positioned, but I think you can be even more aggressive in your crop to remove some of the bright areas in the top right hand corner by going to a square format.

The preset formats do matter when you are printing and are constrained by paper or frame sizes. When shooting for posting on the internet, those "rules" should not constrain you.

Hi Manfred - Interesting that you mention printing because I was considering giving this photo a try on Pixma Pro-100. I haven't been brave enough to try it yet..... Which paper and what size....
If I used the 4x5 for printing, I think I'd edit the right top corner to darken the bright area.

You are definitely reading my mind because even though I really enjoy rocks, it is the garter snake that is the emphasis of this photo. I like the square crop you've presented.

Thanks for your comments and suggestions!

[Manfred M]

Hi Manfred - Interesting that you mention printing because I was considering giving this photo a try on Pixma Pro-100. I haven't been brave enough to try it yet..... Which paper and what size....
If I used the 4x5 for printing, I think I'd edit the right top corner to darken the bright area.

You are definitely reading my mind because even though I really enjoy rocks, it is the garter snake that is the emphasis of this photo. I like the square crop you've presented.

Thanks for your comments and suggestions!

When I print for display, I generally look at where it will be displayed. Hanging a large image on a wall will get a completely different approach versus displaying it on a desk.

In terms of presentation, I will also look at whether I plant matte and frame it, put it a frame where I don't use a matte or if I am going to have it mounted on fibreboard, rather than in a frame. Once I have that figured out I will go on to the next step and if I am looking at mounting a framed shot, I'll head off to one of the local art supply or craft stores and look at frames to find one that will suit the image and size. I generally avoid custom frame sizes due to cost, but have gone that route on occasion when I could not find an off-the-shelf frame that I like. I was looking at frames this past weekend and noted a couple of 8" x 8" and 12" x 12" image size frames that came with precut mattes, as well as the more standard sized (8"x10", 8-1/2" x 11", 11" x 14", 16" x 20", etc).

Once I pick up the frame, I then decide what to do with the image. Depending on the image size, I tend to print with a plain border that will work with the matte. I generally have at least a 1/4" border showing on a small frame and that can get to be around an inch on larger ones. It depends on what works for me.

I use a pigment based printer, so will generally print on higher end archival (rag or lignin free, acid free) papers. I use normal glass or resin rather than glare free glass, as the image look better. The paper texture is hidden by glass, so the actual paper choice is really up to you. I tend to print on either matte finish papers or baryta papers (lustre). I would probably print your snake on a matte paper as would work well on that type of surface, possibly on a natural paper (off-white) as that would work well with the rocks and natural colours of the snake. I might consider a textured paper as that would suit the rock surfaces and snake's scales, but it really depends on your personal taste and the papers you happen to own.

With animal and flower shots, I generally stay away from B&W prints, although you could go either way with this image.

P.S. When I print with fine art matte papers, I wear white cotton gloves when handling the paper in order to avoid transferring the oils on my hands to the paper.

[DanK]

Sandy,

If you are using pre-made frames, then you have to use the aspect ratio that matches the cut-out in the matte. If you are not using pre-made frames, you can do whatever you want. I generally let the image dictate the aspect ratio, but then you have to use custom frames or at least cut a mat yourself. There are several online stores that offer very good prices on frames. I use Frame Destination most of the time. They have a very easy interface: you can either pick a standard frame or customize it, and if the latter, you can chose the frame, the mat, the border size, and so on.

The Pixma Pro 100 uses dye-based inks, which are not archival, but they last for years before fading if not put in direct sunlight, and the printer can produce stunning images. I now use an expensive printer in order to have archival inks and a larger format, but the fact is that the prints don't look much different from those I used to print on a Pro-100.

I'd probably try a luster paper for this, as a less expensive alternative to a baryta paper. Most of the prints I made on that printer were on luster papers. If you don't yet have paper on hand, both Moab and Red River make very nice luster papers. I haven't printed with the Canon luster paper. However, it is just a matter of taste.

Dan

[skitterbug]

Hi Manfred - You shared lots of information and I really appreciate the time taken to respond to my print quandary. I am looking forward to trying my hand for printing because I want to see a few of my better photos displayed.

I don't have a large collection of paper yet. I purchased a Pro Paper Sampler from Canon and when I purchased the printer, paper was included with it too. A family member gifted me 25 sheets of Canson Infinity Rag. Not sure what to use this for yet.

This process is going to be interesting. The worst I can do is never do it and the best I can do is end up with something that I can enjoy!

Thanks for replying!

[Manfred M]

A family member gifted me 25 sheets of Canson Infinity Rag. Not sure what to use this for yet.

The Canson Rag paper you have is an archival paper designed for long print life. It's a matte fine art paper.

The Epson Hot Press Natural I use in portraiture and some landscapes (warm toned ones) has very similar specs to that Canson paper. They appear have two different weights, so I'm not sure which one you have.

The one thing to watch for with matte papers is that they tend to bleed a bit more than lustre ones (especially with dye based inks), so prints need a touch more output sharpening when you use them.

[skitterbug]

Hi Dan - I appreciate the added info about printing and ways to accomplish it! I am also glad to know that the printer that I purchased should do a decent job of it. I agonized about what to purchase. I probably won't print much beyond 8.5 x 11 and maybe even 8 x 8 or 5 x 7 for now. I have a decent paper cutter that won't mess up edges and I need to be careful not to fingerprint my images.

If I ever become bold enough, Canon included 50 sheets of 13 x 19 Pro Luster paper. But I think trying an image that size will require some consideration to the subject matter of a well done image.

I will check out papers that both you and Manfred suggested. This part of photography will definitely add interest to my exploration of creating images and displaying them.

Thank you for replying!

[skitterbug]

The Canson Rag paper you have is an archival paper designed for long print life. It's a matte fine art paper.

The Epson Hot Press Natural I use in portraiture and some landscapes (warm toned ones) has very similar specs to that Canson paper. They appear have two different weights, so I'm not sure which one you have.

The one thing to watch for with matte papers is that they tend to bleed a bit more than lustre ones (especially with dye based inks), so prints need a touch more output sharpening when you use them.

Hi Manfred - Not sure I have anything worth archiving at the moment. The label for the Canson paper says it is ultra smooth, pure white, 210g/m²

The sample pack from Canon has paper weight from 56 to 80. So a question about weight, what would be a decent weight of photo paper to use or is that also based on what a person would like to display?

Thanks!

[Manfred M]

Hi Manfred - Not sure I have anything worth archiving at the moment. The label for the Canson paper says it is ultra smooth, pure white, 210g/m²

The sample pack from Canon has paper weight from 56 to 80. So a question about weight, what would be a decent weight of photo paper to use or is that also based on what a person would like to display?

Thanks!

Archival just means that the paper has properties that will prevent it from deteriorating and the ink that is applied to it from deteriorating. Nicely said, if properly handled and stored, images printed on it will last a very long time.

There are two basic ingredients used to make paper; they can be either wood based (alpha cellulose) or cotton based (in the past rag meant recycled cotton rags, hence the term "rag" in its description). Cotton based papers are very resistant to breakdown. All papers are naturally warm toned so chemicals and additives are used in many to give them a more neutral or cool tone.

Alpha cellulose papers are made from trees (wood) which contains alpha cellulose and lignin. Lignin is what gives wood its characteristic colour which ranges from light yellow to dark brown. High quality papers have the lignin removed during processing and lower end ones "bleach" the lignin to reduce or eliminate the colour. Unfortunately, the chemical bleaching does wear off over time and the paper will start to yellow. Alpha cellulose is less stable than cotton and it too will start to break down over time. In order to slow this process, the paper manufacturers add chemicals to slow the pace of breakdown.

Residual compounds in wood-based papers tend to be acidic, which lead to the breakdown of the alpha cellulose as well as attacking the inks that we apply to the papers. Papers are chemically treated to eliminate the acidity (so that they are slightly alkaline) and buffered to inhibit the chemical reactions.

Some (many) papers contain an optical bleaching agent (OBA) which fluoresces when exposed to ultraviolet wavelengths, for instance sunlight or output from certain types of light sources (fluorescent lights, etc.). This give the image more "pop". These papers will have more of a cool tone. Other papers don't have this treatment as have a warmer tone. Picking one that suits your subject is something that you as the printer will have to consider. Under lights that do not emit UV, these OBA are not active and the paper looks like paper without them. OBA based papers tend to have somewhat shorter lives than the equivalent OBA free ones, but that does vary from paper to paper. Some are quite stable and have lives that can exceed OBA free ones.

Papers and inks are affected by ambient conditions. They break down when exposed to UV and airborne contaminants. Putting them behind glass or coating them with a protective spray extends the life of both the paper and the ink. As Dan has mentioned there are basically two types of inkjet inks. Your printer uses dye based inks whereas pigment based inks found in higher end printers use ground up minerals (just like traditional paints) and are more resistant to fading. Under the right storage conditions pigment based inks on archival papers can last hundreds of years without any noticeable fading. Dye based inks have gotten a lot better and last a very long time to, but I have not seen any reliable data longevity of dye based inks.

When it comes to actual paper choices ( the factors I mentioned, thickness and surface finish) there are several key factors on deciding which way to go. The first item is "fashion" and currently "fine art matte" and "baryta" papers are very much in fashion, so any fine art prints you see are often printed on these surfaces. Thicker (higher grammage) papers feel more luxurious and suggest quality to someone handling the print. Cooler toned papers tend to work well with subjects that have cooler tones in them whereas warmer tone papers are often favoured in portraiture of with warmer toned subjects. This means your personal tastes do come into play when printing, so experiment with sampler packs to see which ones you like. I have settled on around four papers that I use in my work and I do try different papers from time to time. I am going to buy some Japanese washi papers (Ilford and Moab sell it) for some delicate high key prints.

I could talk for hours on this subject, so I hope you find this brief introduction helpful.

[skitterbug]

Hi Manfred - Yes, I did find your introduction both interesting and helpful. And maybe this short story will make you chuckle.... after unboxing, etc. of the printer, one of my first tries on the pro-100 was using a sheet of plain copy paper. It ended up heavily inked and quite a mess and tossed into the rubbish bin! So yes, proper paper does make a difference. Eventually, I did print the cardinal photo from one of the monthly competitions on a Canon Pro luster paper. The results are suitable for now. But this subject of paper/printing/display is definitely a work in progress and one that I believe I will very much enjoy exploring.

Thank you for sharing!

[Wavelength]

Great images; is that snake venomous?