What's the difference? - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

01/19/2009 05:28:18 AM · #1

I'd like some feedback about what may have attributed to my fly macro score significantly lower than the two on the front page this week.

I'm sure part of it had to do with being in a Freestudy versus a regular weekly challenge, but is there more to it than that? What did their shots have that mine lacked?

Mine - 6.0240

7.3750

6.9697

Apple iPhone 5

01/19/2009 05:30:16 AM · #2

Originally posted by aliqui:

What did their shots have that mine lacked?

Green. :)

And the angle - A head-on angle for these insect macros always seems to do better.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

01/19/2009 05:33:50 AM · #3

Originally posted by JH:

Originally posted by aliqui:
What did their shots have that mine lacked?

Green. :)

And the angle - A head-on angle for these insect macros always seems to do better.

The second shot by

GregoryB isn't head on. It's at the same angle as my shot, just facing the other direction.

Apple iPhone 5

01/19/2009 05:40:41 AM · #4

Originally posted by aliqui:

Originally posted by JH:

Originally posted by aliqui:
What did their shots have that mine lacked?

Green. :)

And the angle - A head-on angle for these insect macros always seems to do better.

The second shot by GregoryB isn't head on. It's at the same angle as my shot, just facing the other direction.

It's closer in (the head nearly fills the frame), you can see more detail in the hairs. The colours are more vibrant (the green and the reddish brown) - There's nothing technically wrong with your shot, I'm only offering some suggestions, nobody can read the voters collective hive mind... :)

Oh, and the fact it was in a free study, where voting is often more harsh.

Covert_Oddity

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

01/19/2009 05:43:46 AM · #5

Originally posted by JH:

Oh, and the fact it was in a free study, where voting is often more harsh.

That's quite true, my first free study entry got hammered, and I thought it was a pretty OK shot.

One of the comments said something like "Doesn't have the wow factor for free study", so it's clear judging there is harsher (could also be that it was really bad shot but who knows).

tjbel05

Nikon Z9

Nikon NIKKOR Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S

01/19/2009 10:07:16 AM · #6

First, I did not vote in this challenge. Im certainly not an expert, but IMHO, the other two are brighter, more colorful, and just seem to pop more. There is nothing "wrong" with yours, the others are just more inviting.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

01/19/2009 10:18:59 AM · #7

I'm really surprised you're asking this question, actually. The two front page images are vibrant, detailed images that allow us to marvel at the intricacy of the structure of this tiny creature, and the concentration on the eyes gives them an eerie, alien feeling. Your shot, on the other hand, is very drab by comparison, the details are murky and inconclusive, it just looks like... a dead fly!

Seriously... Two images with super-pop-wow factor, and one that's "just a bug"...

R.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

01/20/2009 06:10:52 AM · #8

JH thought

GregoryB's photo was more of a frontal shot than mine even though the angle was the same, just facing a different direction. What do I learn from this? Left facing isn't as appealing as right facing? I actually flipped it a couple times before submitting debating the same question.

Sharpness... were the details "murky and inconclusive" because the focus was off or because of the color range (I wonder what an HDR version would look like...)? Was my lighting off? I thought the sharpness was pretty good, though I admit it could have been better. Killing the mirror slap is on my list of things I haven't quite gotten around to looking up, but will before I set up my next macro shot.

Covert_Oddity

Nikon D700

01/20/2009 06:51:09 AM · #9

To be honest I think it's remarkable what a picture of a bug will score in general! Just because it's a bug tends to lift the score by a full point or so. Would be interesting to see what your (or other bug shots) would score with the same technicals but a different subject.

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

01/20/2009 06:57:31 AM · #10

Originally posted by Covert_Oddity:

They do terribly unless it's a flower. I've tried it multiple times, heh.

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

01/20/2009 07:37:42 AM · #11

I know this can get frustrating but keep at it. Sometimes it's just something subtle that makes all the difference. The key is to put the voters in a positive frame of mind. The way to do that is to give them something that will immediately impress them. In your case it would be getting closer while maintaining a high level of detail and sharpness. You must have that with macros. Your image is sharp but it just isn't close enough to be impressive. You can get away with that if you make it up elsewhere such as catching your fly in a more appealing way such as in mid-flight or choosing a more exotic, more colorful insect. Once you have the voter in a positive frame of mind they may choose to overlook some of your image's shortcomings. However, when the voter isn't immediately impressed they start to look for reasons not like the photo and will start nitpicking. So instead of averaging lots of 7s you get lots of 6s and 5s and you are staring at a 5.8-6.0 shot instead of one near 7.

Message edited by author 2009-01-20 07:39:49.

rlewis

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

01/20/2009 07:44:35 AM · #12

One difference may be in the use of a flash or not. The second image indicates that a flash was used and I wouldn't be surprised if a flash was used in the third. The flash allows the image to be brighter, more contrast and the colors to be brought out in areas that might be darker in your image. If you look at the three images as thumbnails the second and third images are brighter than the first image.

Rgarcia

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 II M.Zuiko ED

01/20/2009 07:46:29 AM · #13

Lighting!!!
Light is a key factor for obtaining the vibrancy of the other two against your entry, your lighting is somewhat hard compared to the other entries.
Then there is the green color in the background of the other entries...

pix-al

Canon EOS-5D

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

01/20/2009 08:10:55 AM · #14

Originally posted by Rgarcia:

Agreed.

Yours has a very harsh light focused on the bug, the lighting falls off meaning your background is not illuminated.
The other two are well lit, with background elements (Even though out of focus) being in keeping with the subject matter.

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

01/20/2009 08:40:15 AM · #15

Roz shot has a waterdrop in it, that guarantees a higher score (when everything else is OK)

01/20/2009 01:17:40 PM · #16

Originally posted by pix-al:

Originally posted by Rgarcia:
Lighting!!!
Light is a key factor for obtaining the vibrancy of the other two against your entry, your lighting is somewhat hard compared to the other entries.
Then there is the green color in the background of the other entries...

Agreed.

Yours has a very harsh light focused on the bug, the lighting falls off meaning your background is not illuminated.
The other two are well lit, with background elements (Even though out of focus) being in keeping with the subject matter.

So what you're saying is I should start using the little diffusers that came with my macro flashes for my DPC submissions?

=)

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

01/25/2009 04:27:11 PM · #17

Originally posted by aliqui:

Thanks guys!

Bear, the reason I asked was to get an opinion other than my own. I guess it was a stupid question, but I gotta learn somehow...

The obvious difference was the bright green vs the black and grey (or as Bear put it; drab). Since my style generally leans towards "drab" I'm used to the lack of its acceptance. From my shoes it's hard to differentiate between voters not liking my style and not liking my technicals.

Composition also appears to have been an issue. Prior to the challenge a friend mentioned the clipped wings, but photographers cut off the tops of people's heads in portraits all the time, so I figured a little wing clipping was A-okay. I found it interesting that JH thought GregoryB's photo was more of a frontal shot than mine even though the angle was the same, just facing a different direction. What do I learn from this? Left facing isn't as appealing as right facing? I actually flipped it a couple times before submitting debating the same question.

Sharpness... were the details "murky and inconclusive" because the focus was off or because of the color range (I wonder what an HDR version would look like...)? Was my lighting off? I thought the sharpness was pretty good, though I admit it could have been better. Killing the mirror slap is on my list of things I haven't quite gotten around to looking up, but will before I set up my next macro shot.

Crap, apparently you can't lock the mirror on a D80 with a lens on. I'm doomed to forever have slightly unsharp images.

Mick

Canon EOS-5D

01/25/2009 05:28:13 PM · #18

Originally posted by aliqui:

Crap, apparently you can't lock the mirror on a D80 with a lens on. I'm doomed to forever have slightly unsharp images.

Your D80 has an exposure delay mode to minimize camera shake. See custom setting #31 on your menu. The mirror lock is only for sensor cleaning.