Carpenter ant

acerola · Post by **acerola** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:31 am

A carpenter ant from Europe. Camponotus vagus

beetleman · Post by **beetleman** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:40 am

That is very up close Peter. A beautiful head shot. Focus and DOF are excellent IMO. I like the antennae grooves on top of the head

Bruce Williams · Post by **Bruce Williams** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:24 am

This is an amazing close-up Péter, far superior to any of my own "live" insect studies todate. However on my monitor the front of the head is quite dark and it is difficult to make out all of the great detail present in the image.

I don't know if you use Photoshop CS2 to post-process your images. I took the liberty of downloading your image and doing a single tweak in the CS2 Shadow/Highlight adjustment tool and it brought out a huge amount of previously hidden (on my monitor) detail on the ant's head and left (as you view) antenna.

I used the following settings: Shadows 50/30/30, Highlights 15/40/30, Color correction +20 and Midtone Contrast +8. I didn't spend long playing with the sliders so almost certainly these settings can be improved on.

I might also be tempted to use the History Brush to paint back the original levels onto the right (as you view) antenna.

Péter - It's very possible that your monitor (and others) shows detail where mine does not, so the above suggestion is based on the viewing characteristics of my TFT monitor.

If you don't have CS2 I'd be happy to email you the result of the Shadow/Highlight tool tweak.

Bruce

acerola · Post by **acerola** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:53 pm

Hi Bruce! I tried it. And it is too strong for me, or to my monitor. I have to decrease the effect to 30% to my likings. I like to use S/H tools but I don't like to use the shadow option much. It is a kind of unnatural to me. It makes a picture a little washed up. But I like to set the contrast here.
But thanks for the suggestion, a little tweaking do help the picture.

Bruce Williams · Post by **Bruce Williams** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:10 pm

Interesting Péter. Your findings have got me rechecking my monitor.

I have a fairly old LG Flatron TFT monitor (~3.5 years old) that is very critical in terms of eye position (height). I use Adobe Gamma to calibrate my monitor but of course the results of that are also dependent on eye-to-screen height?

I've just been checking the before and after S/H ant pics, first moving my head up ~4 inches and then down ~4 inches from my normal viewing position.

At my normal position (eye looking at screen centre) the "after S/H" shows much more detail and does not look washed out.

At head raised ~4 inches the "after S/H" image is definitely too washed out (as you found), however the ant face in the original image is still a little dark and would benefit from some (but not as much) S/H.

At head down ~4 inches the original image is far too dark for me to see any detail on the front of the ant's head.

All this doesn't really get me anywhere - but it's interesting (and just bit concerning too).

Interesting that you don't tend to use the Shadow option in the S/H tool, because I tend to tweak mainly shadows and use the Highlight adjustment only if there are burnt out areas in the image. I'm not suggesting that there is a "right or wrong" way of using the tool - just interesting to note how we use it differently

. I do agree that there is a real risk of getting a washed out result with this tool.

Thanks for trying it out

.

Bruce

acerola · Post by **acerola** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:59 am

Hi Bruce!
I use it but with care. And I forget to use it for this picture.
Most of the time I use the shadow part only with the lowest possible settings.
This picture is an exception as it require a little more than the lowest.

I alternate between the tools. I used S/H a lot in a time, but after that I realized if I go back to other tools like curves or the middle lever on levels I get somewhat similar result with a more natural picture.
Post processing is very important and can be done a lots of ways. If you use your usual ways you sometimes did not get the optimal result. So I'm always open to suggestions. Thanks.

Mike B in OKlahoma · Post by **Mike B in OKlahoma** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:13 pm

As mentioned, impressive closeup! I like ant pictures!

On my monitor, the picture looks just a tiny bit darker than I think it should. I suspect I'm losing details in part of the face. On the other hand, it's been awhile since I've calibrated my monitor, so I might be off-calibration myself.

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:52 pm

Hmm...everything looks sharp and clear on my monitor, excellent details down to the pores in the ants exoskeleton and the DOF is quite good

If any of you would be in the market for a new monitor, I suggest the HP w19b, its really great. I have never had mine calibrated since I got it and to tell the truth I would not even go messing with it, its great and so is that ant portrait Péter!

Moebius · Post by **Moebius** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:52 pm

Ant looks good on my monitor except perhaps down by the mandibles, but have to admit it is calibrated only with free software, not a good calibration program with all the fixin's.

Shadows & highlights - I love this tool and used it quite often in my Amazon series as they are often underexposed a little bit. I would say for that whole series I usually did just 3 things in my processing; crop, S&H, and sharpening. Can't live without my S&H.

However, I have been given many suggestions and tutorials on layers and blending, burn & dodge, etc. (mostly by the good people on this forum) and such that I want to explore more when time permits. For now, in processing the large number of photos I have, a little S&H helps quite a bit.

Ken

Planapo · Post by **Planapo** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:19 pm

Hi Péter, I really like your portrait of a C. vagus major worker. It´s a crisp photo that shows a lot of detail and is nicely composed with the head not totally centered.

Unfortunately C. vagus is quite rare in Germany, can only be found in a few very warm and dry habitats so I´ve encountered this species only a few times so far. Does it occur commonly in Hungary?

And if you´re not bothered, I´d really like to know what equipment you´ve used to capture this beautiful head portrait.

Cheers,
Betty

acerola · Post by **acerola** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 2:31 pm

I can only tell that C. Vagus is quite common in one of the place I usually go to photograph. It is at a lakeside and the side of the nearby hills. Really big and amazing ants.
My equipment is Canon EOS 20D and I used a Canon 18-55mm lens reversed.