Damselfly - cloudy & rainy day

MacroLuv · Post by **MacroLuv** » Mon May 07, 2007 2:27 pm

Because of cloudy and rainy day I was forced to use higher ISO settings ISO 800 which I normally avoid and use unwillingly.
However, result is not so bad, I suppose.

Model Canon EOS 400D DIGITAL
Date/time original 05.05.2007 09:48:11
Shutter speed value 1/250 s
Aperture value f/6.3
ISO speed ratings ISO 800
Focal length 100 mm

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Mon May 07, 2007 3:08 pm

Very nice Nikola.

I find images like this hard to compose. Subject fills the frame but still does not look quite right because of its length and then I consider a verticle composition but still again that does not look right either, maybe because of the background or substrate that it may be posed on, so I go back to the horizontal and hope for the best.

You have a good image here.

Sharp, good color and pleasing background. You had reservations about ISO 800, so do I. I have been shooting at 400 for a good while but as of today have gone back to ISO 100 in lieu of using a NR program, which brings me to ask, did you use one on this photograph? The reason I am inquiring is that, (1) it is very clean for ISO 800 and (2) I notice some compression artifacts around the tail or abdomen of the damsel, though they are very slight and you really have to be looking for them. Also your signature gives them away really good if you look closely. The reason why I notice these artifacts so much is that I used to see them all the time, around my signature especially, when I used Neat Image Demo.

Could be the retail version does not have this problem, since the demo, quite obviously, is only for demonstration. Just the same, NR or not, you have a really nice photograph here.

By the way, I noticed the camera settings and the lens mm. Did you by chance get a EF 100mm macro for your xti?

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Mon May 07, 2007 6:13 pm

It's a pretty damselfly, Nikola.

About the composition, there's always the rule of thirds to fall back on. You know the one -- always put your subject 1/3 of the way in from an edge.

In this case, I'd be inclined to whack about 120 pixels off the top. That turns the thing into about a 2:1 horizontal format with the subject at the top 1/3 line.

About the noise, I find that I'm either happy or not with ISO 800 depending on how I'm going to use the image. If it's going to get printed high res or cropped down to something approaching actual pixels, then it's too noisy. But if the full frame is going to get averaged down to an 800-pixels web image, then it's just fine. (There's close to 4X reduction in noise level just from the averaging!)

FWIW...

--Rik

beetleman · Post by **beetleman** » Mon May 07, 2007 8:03 pm

Very nice capture Nikola. The damselfly seems to pop out from the background. Lots of great detail along his whole body.

MacroLuv · Post by **MacroLuv** » Tue May 15, 2007 2:31 am

Thanks folks!

Ken, yes I applied NeatImage. I'm very pleased with it. But there should not be artifacts if you apply it correctly.

I think what you consider as "artifacts" on this photo is actually visible on original photograph too. Never apply it before levels adjustment, that is from my experience. However, no way about artifacts around signature because I added signature last in order.
Yessss! I got my 100 mm macro lens after almost two months waiting!

Rik, thanks for suggestions. I know what "WYSIWYG" mean but "FWIW"?

Oh yes, "For What It's Worth"?