| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/03/2009 03:04:33 PM · #1 |
Okay, first of all, do not let this influence your own personal scoring, commenting, appreciation of another one's work etc, etc, etc. If you think that might happen, stop right here....
Second, I have not entered this challenge so I am not troll voting or whatever.
Third, I always use the full 1-10 scale with a 5-6 being average, and the rest gradually down and up to top and crap.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Quite frankly I was shocked by the quality of this challenge and never ever voted a challenge so low. And I have voted on quite a few Macro challenges in the past years. This is absolutely not normal. With an average vote of 3.8 and only 6 photos above 5, sorry, but I don't have time to write comments at this moment. So here is a summary for all the 148 photos below 5 and some of the 44 5's.
Serious lack of creativity, many random uninspired photos of stuff apparently just laying around. This results in boring blah photos. I am not interested in what you found in your kitchen drawer. Do you really think anyone is interested in looking a a simple point and shoot macro of an uninteresting everyday object?
Some photos absolutely not a macro or extreme close-up.
With macro's lighting is one of the most important elements. Most photos show absolutely no effort to do decent lighting.
Serious depth of field (DOF) issues. Either to shallow, or to wide. Macro does not stand for trying to get a minimal part of your subject (if there is one) in your DOF. No, the subject, or the key element of your subject should be sharp in your DOF. Get your lens out of the f/2.8-f5 zone.
And add to that... FOCUS. The focus should be spot on. Not just before or just behind your subject /key element.
Motion Blur: Macro needs a very steady hand and better yet, a tripod or other setup where you don't move the camera. Also be careful with mirror slap. If your camera can do it, use mirror lock/up or live view.
Even with Macro's you should try to get a decent composition. Play with the position and angle of the subject, get a good background, play with lines, play with light and shadows.
Angle! There is soo much flat, straight on, 2D stuff out there. It makes for a boring image. Depth is what you need to find.
Postprocessing: If you do not agree with postprocessing, then be sure to try it as long as possible with your camera to get a good out of the camera result. If you cannot manage that or don't mind postprocessing, do a decent job. Key elements in basic editing is the contrast toning, levels, curves, color balance (or selective colors to balance), crop and sharpness. Do not oversharpen your photo so that you see halo's and emphasize noise (see tutorials on this site). Don't neatimage your photo into oblivion. Play with colors and contrast to find a balance that pleases you. At first it may take an hour. After some time you do it in 20 seconds.
And one other thing: Be self critical. Don't expect another to point out all the flaws and don't complain about 1s and 2s and 3s after the challenge. Look at your photo and think about what you can improve. If you would really use a scale from 1 to 10, where would you really rate it? Ask someone other than your partner or parent to look at your photo with a critical eye. What do they miss? And do not suck up to your own ego.
If you see something that you can do better, redo the whole thing. Try again the day after. If you think you finally have it, shoot another 20 photos with a slightly different setup. Play with the light.
Oh and don't let this make you feel bad or want to leave or never enter a challenge again. Just do your best to create something better next time.
And I suck too most of the times. Couldn't get a Macro that I would give more than a 3 myself, so I didn't enter.
And sometimes it is fun to suck.
And break rules sometimes.
Message edited by author 2009-12-03 15:06:55.
|
|
|
|
12/03/2009 03:10:53 PM · #2 |
| All good comments I think -some of which certainly apply to my entry. I have to say, I struggled with Basic Editing; I know how to do stuff in Advanced, but shooting for basic leaves me fewer options. Perhaps that means I'm better with my software than I am with my camera. Probably true!! |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 03:11:45 PM · #3 |
| I actually agree with you on the general quality of the entries, but I disagree on some of your points. Particularly, "There is soo much flat, straight on, 2D stuff out there. It makes for a boring image." Disagree. If you're obsessing over a technical detail like that, perhaps you're missing out on overall composition. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 03:20:36 PM · #4 |
| Well said. I certainly am not perfect but you point out so many things I saw as well. Perhaps you could comment on the challenge entries to give those photographers some points to improve on? The generalization is a good start though... |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 03:32:23 PM · #5 |
| many of your points I agree with and I would welcome your in site on our entries (mine) on this...I am hoping you will do a 100% commenting on this as I am also in agreement with you on many of the points...but my scoring was much higher I will say. And I am getting ready to do some of my comments for this challenge today. So let's roll up our sleeves and get some commenting done... |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 03:35:40 PM · #6 |
| On the positive side, there are a whole bunch of eyeball shots and none of them are titled "Window to the soul". |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 03:36:11 PM · #7 |
| You made some very good points here, although I don't agree with all of them, but (just my opinion) this challenge is not about submitting a good macro photo, but about the best macro photo you can make in the week this challenge runs (with all the time restrictions many of us have). And if you put some effort in it, why not submit? You gain nothing with not submitting and it's always better to have a low score than no score. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 03:38:02 PM · #8 |
I really wanted to enter this challenge but didn't due to exactly this:
"Serious lack of creativity, many random uninspired photos of stuff apparently just laying around."
I saw how I could use my normal lens reversed as a macro lens and really wanted to try it out. My problem was I couldn't find anything interesting to shoot before the deadline. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 03:45:49 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by bmatt17:
I really wanted to enter this challenge but didn't due to exactly this:
"Serious lack of creativity, many random uninspired photos of stuff apparently just laying around."
I saw how I could use my normal lens reversed as a macro lens and really wanted to try it out. My problem was I couldn't find anything interesting to shoot before the deadline. |
I gotta disagree with that; for me the beauty of macro is that EVERYTHING is interesting if you get close enough :-(
R. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 03:58:45 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by bmatt17:
I really wanted to enter this challenge but didn't due to exactly this:
"Serious lack of creativity, many random uninspired photos of stuff apparently just laying around."
I saw how I could use my normal lens reversed as a macro lens and really wanted to try it out. My problem was I couldn't find anything interesting to shoot before the deadline. |
I gotta disagree with that; for me the beauty of macro is that EVERYTHING is interesting if you get close enough :-(
R. |
That's my philosophy with macros too. I like to think I can make anything look appealing, whether it's a thumb-tack or a nail.
As for the OP, I now am curious and will go vote.
I'll be looking for real macros and extreme closeups. I'll vote down anything that steps out of that boundary. A shot of your cats full face in full frame IS NOT A MACRO! ;\
Message edited by author 2009-12-03 16:01:09. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 04:11:16 PM · #11 |
Bear: I agree that mundane items can look great when shot macro. I tried several pictures of a few different subjects and wasn't able to come up with anything I thought was better than a 3. Hence why I decided not to enter.
In the hands of a better photographer than I though, yes I agree with what you're saying 100%. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 04:18:50 PM · #12 |
I'm pretty angry about my score right now for this challenge. It's sitting at 4.9, and of course no one is offering their criticism to help me understand. I've got multi-angled lighting, good focus, good visual depth and colors, and I think it's pretty damn clever.
I take 2 minutes to take a crappy macro of a piece of broccoli that doesn't even fit what the challenge required and it gets into my top 5 with a 6.37, but when I actually try to be creative, take 50+ shots of the same thing with different angles and concepts, it bombs. Makes me (self-censored)'n sick.
I've gotten pretty good about realizing what's out of the box and what I expect to score poorly, but!! This one is getting to me. I can't wait to see what out of focus, uncreative piece of crap scores higher at the end of the challenge.
Inhale, exhale... |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 04:28:07 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Jac:
A shot of your cats full face in full frame IS NOT A MACRO! ;\ |
No, but it is an extreme close up......the details of the challenge did say macro or extreme closeup. No, I did not enter a cat face, but just saying.....
As for the OP's insight. I think you put it all pretty good. Nice to see someone put a detailed explanation for how they see things vs just complaining about the entries.
Message edited by author 2009-12-03 16:30:59. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 04:36:59 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by aliqui:
I take 2 minutes to take a crappy macro of a piece of broccoli that doesn't even fit what the challenge required and it gets into my top 5 with a 6.37, but when I actually try to be creative, take 50+ shots of the same thing with different angles and concepts, it bombs. Makes me (self-censored)'n sick.
|
Broccoli is really nice
All great points  Azrifel - I am glad you pointed them out
.. I for one was looking through my kitchen drawers to shoot for the tools challenge and ended up entering macro challenge - because my tools were not inspiring enough... If this is the general consensus, does it mean a low score could ribbon or be in the top 5? :) |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 05:02:28 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by aliqui:
I can't wait to see what out of focus, uncreative piece of crap scores higher at the end of the challenge.
Inhale, exhale... |
Well, it certainly won't be my out of focus, uncreative piece of crap as its at about 4.1 at the moment! :) Out of focus?! Don't talk to me about out of focus!! :) Thats what happens when the only macro equipment one has is stuck on the end of a lensbaby.
All interesting good points Azifel and ones that i'll keep in mind for the future.
|
|
|
|
12/03/2009 05:14:32 PM · #16 |
| so, none of the battery or pencil or rainbow challenges bored you, but this one does? Sheesh. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 05:42:03 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by aliqui:
I'm pretty angry about my score right now for this challenge. It's sitting at 4.9, and of course no one is offering their criticism to help me understand. I've got multi-angled lighting, good focus, good visual depth and colors, and I think it's pretty damn clever.
I take 2 minutes to take a crappy macro of a piece of broccoli that doesn't even fit what the challenge required and it gets into my top 5 with a 6.37, but when I actually try to be creative, take 50+ shots of the same thing with different angles and concepts, it bombs. Makes me (self-censored)'n sick.
I've gotten pretty good about realizing what's out of the box and what I expect to score poorly, but!! This one is getting to me. I can't wait to see what out of focus, uncreative piece of crap scores higher at the end of the challenge.
Inhale, exhale... |
I agree!! I must have taken 20 different shots and really liked what I entered. But my 4.8x poorly executed shot won't be winning anything. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 05:55:13 PM · #18 |
I took 100+ shots, and was thinking I have something interesting. Its not doing too good right now, and after reading this, I'm thinking...Is mine out of focus?...uncreative peace of crap?... bad PP? ...bad photo?..
Maybe its mirror on my camera?
Maybe my lens?
Did my cat fidget too much? (no I don't have a cat photo)
anyway, good points but are they applicable to my pic? If I don't know what I did wrong how am I to fix it?
|
|
|
|
12/03/2009 08:42:39 PM · #19 |
| Man oh man...I'm currently doing the commenting on this challenge...I am more than 25% through the group and the vast majority of them...just didn't get the concept...I am in total (well almost total) agreement with OP in this thread...this is HARD!! |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:25:05 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by ShutterPug:
Originally posted by Jac:
A shot of your cats full face in full frame IS NOT A MACRO! ;\ |
No, but it is an extreme close up......the details of the challenge did say macro or extreme closeup. No, I did not enter a cat face, but just saying.....
As for the OP's insight. I think you put it all pretty good. Nice to see someone put a detailed explanation for how they see things vs just complaining about the entries. |
I have to agree... i am getting the sense of some arbitrary definition of "macro"... can someone cite a hard, technical definition?
i could have cropped the heck out of my capture, but i let the previous macro challenges AND the caveat of "or extreme close-up" guide my final size...
-mefnj |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:28:27 PM · #21 |
You have rated 100 of 198 images (51%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 16 images (8%) in this challenge.
You have given an average score of 3.9600.
I agree 100% with the OP. This is not like the other Macro challenges before this one. Quality is way way down. A few good ones, a few very good ones but overall this was painful to my eyes.
Langdon, please eliminate the reference to closeups in the next Macro challenge. Just once. Many here have the equipment necessary to do proper macros.
Please. :D |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:30:14 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Azrifel:
And add to that... FOCUS. The focus should be spot on. Not just before or just behind your subject /key element.
Motion Blur: Macro needs a very steady hand and better yet, a tripod or other setup where you don't move the camera. Also be careful with mirror slap. If your camera can do it, use mirror lock/up or live view. |
i might add... i almost always use 2 sec shutter delay, wireless remote control, or even both, when shooting close-ups and long(er) exposures due to small aperatures to get large DOF.
-mefnj |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:37:22 PM · #23 |
I've done some voting too, and have to admit that I am giving out a helluva lot of 5s. I do my best to look for reasons to give out a good score, as opposed to looking for reasons to give out a low score.
And yeah, have to admit that it's not really a good idea to say 'extreme close-up' for a macro challenge. A couple of pics were great shots of their subjects, but were by no means macros, and would be hard-pressed to even call ECUs. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:44:10 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Serious depth of field (DOF) issues. Either to shallow, or to wide. Macro does not stand for trying to get a minimal part of your subject (if there is one) in your DOF. No, the subject, or the key element of your subject should be sharp in your DOF. Get your lens out of the f/2.8-f5 zone.
And add to that... FOCUS. The focus should be spot on. Not just before or just behind your subject /key element.
|
So why can't a macro be f2.8 if it's done well?
I never really do macros but I took quite a few before submitting one to this challenge. I played with the DOF and decided the shots at f22 or f45 that had the subjects completely in focus were kind of dull compared to a selective focus really closeup... and if you're looking for creativity, IMO it's more interesting.
I'm usually the odd ball so it doesn't surprise me that I got it wrong, and of course I realize that the subject matters, but can someone please explain. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:51:15 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Serious depth of field (DOF) issues. Either to shallow, or to wide. Macro does not stand for trying to get a minimal part of your subject (if there is one) in your DOF. No, the subject, or the key element of your subject should be sharp in your DOF. Get your lens out of the f/2.8-f5 zone.
And add to that... FOCUS. The focus should be spot on. Not just before or just behind your subject /key element.
|
So why can't a macro be f2.8 if it's done well?
I never really do macros but I took quite a few before submitting one to this challenge. I played with the DOF and decided the shots at f22 or f45 that had the subjects completely in focus were kind of dull compared to a selective focus really closeup... and if you're looking for creativity, IMO it's more interesting.
I'm usually the odd ball so it doesn't surprise me that I got it wrong, and of course I realize that the subject matters, but can someone please explain. |
Penny...I almost always use a f/2.8 A as that give a much better background IMO...that lovely bokeh that I love...and my colors (again to me) are sooooo much richer. mind you it depends on the location (sun/shade) of what I am shooting but I seem to like much richer colors than most...
Stats: You have rated 197 of 197 images (100%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 112 images (57%) in this challenge.
You have given an average score of 5.8071.
I'm not done yet and I am trying to up my average score as this bothers me...but this has been a very hard one to comment on and to vote on..... |
|
