Technical requirements for pictures.

Shamil, and where there was a recommendation to take pictures without a flash?As for general comments, the mass of pictures on the site in general (and not necessarily in exactly your) Photos should pay attention to framing (on classics reserve to head Butterfly (in the direction of movement, even if the butterfly on the fact of not moving) more space than at the stern - instead of doing exactly the center or, especially,on the contrary, leave more stern. Second - garbage background against which too many details. I understand that when recording in the field do not always have the opportunity to work with the background, but still there are times, as many fotam again shows that the author of this just was not thinking. Well, out of the field, yes. The people who try to keep my eyes were still in focus.Of course, there are cases where the author deliberately done differently, because there is no hard and fast rules that would be suitable for all pictures and creative ideas. But in most cases it is clear that there was no special pans, but just happened how it happened. Accordingly, if there is a desire and effort to improve their truck - then briefly outlined the situation was.If not - the author of a topic correctly observed, in the case where, for example, without any kind of illustrations on the site, almost any phot will be better than nothing.
ZY In addition to actually shoot a good idea to spend at least some post-processing of color / tone. Well, at least the levels tighten.But! If you do this does not make sense, it is better not to do anything - newcomers tend to greatly overdo with treatment (especially in contrast, color saturation and sharpness).

Add that not all cameras running flash mode makrosёmki. In my soapbox, it just automatically switched off in the "Super" what is right so as to be sure the minimum distance illumination.Collectible copies shoot recommend using as a backlight fluorescent lamps and always with an electronic starting (flickering by high frequency start is practically none), shoot with a tripod and use as a background sheet of white paper.Well and accordingly shaman with some simple editor to correct (as I said I use ACDSee Pro 6). Communicate with complex prog type of Photoshop in this case is not necessary.

By the time the outbreak was probably in order not to use the on-camera flash.
From it obtained shadow ghosting - because it does not coincide with the position of the lens, plus on nearby objects "knocked out" to the state of the color white.
Sam is the use an external flash. So it is possible to blur the shadow pattern make it more readable.Recommendation to take a picture without flash slipped somewhere in the dialogues. I do not remember now.

Camera with flash and fitted even without additional reflectors can get quality shots much higher than the average site. It is sometimes necessary vspyh in full, sometimes only to supplement the sun.
But yes, you can do even better if you use Remote. But most of the images is not enough is not it: -)

Shooting uniquely collectible copies made without the flash - do not need it here in any way! We need a tripod, the camera aperture priority mode, and the minimum possible for her to ISO. Besides (shooting SLR) set a preliminary lifting and lowering of the mirror with a timer (handshake eliminates long exposure).Shooting in nature - the flash is almost always required, and the lens is needed - otherwise we will have failures in shadows and highlights. On the bright sun flare again allows you to remove excess contrasts. Exception - shooting in the early morning or evening.Here again, shooting with a tripod in aperture priority mode with all the nuances described shooting collectible copies (of course with no wind - exposure can be more than a second).

Eugene, if a person has a tripod, and he knows what the aperture priority, he already knows enough to take pictures of above average quality of the site: -) There is no longer a problem with 3+ or 4 points to jump to 5, and with at least 2-3 to 3.5-4: -)

Eugene, about nature photography with a tripod probably a joke? Because the object fly away :)

Dmitry, what a joke, Eugene wrote about the early morning and evening, there is a half hour, you can sit in front of my grandmother, and she will not get anywhere. And sometimes there are situations like this afternoon.Another thing is that if the goal - to capture the maximum number of species with decent quality and not make two images, but with a more than decent, the tripod in the field in most cases, will only interfere.

I prefer possible shooting in cloudy weather or in the early morning. At this time, light is more even, glare-free inherent bright sunny day. When shooting in sunny weather, the flash of course necessary, but in some cases you can simply create a shadow, and remove both the flash and without it, and then compare to the computer.As for the stand-nation removes and eliminates bad, mainly telephoto. But then again, butterflies in my small they did not withdraw, and then look in the scene where she is.
When shooting zoom forced to shoot from 1-5 cm and staff there is clearly an obstacle (the object and can fly).Frankly, I do not understand the need to use a tripod when shooting dynamic obёktov not see the sense in it. It is simple enough to use a fast shutter speed and the result will be the same as when shooting with a tripod static objects. In other words, imagine that shooting avtomotogonki.Will use a slower shutter speed, an object greased. When using short vyderzhki- stops momentarily.

Yuri, I'm talking about a stand in nature, if you shoot at dawn or dusk. There's no short exposures can not be, and hold when shooting handheld shutter speeds slower than 1/10 impossible. And if the SLR, and with a macro lens ... all the pictures with shutter speeds slower than 1/100 to "shake", ie SmAZ in varying degrees.You can, of course, "bully" ISO and shutter speed to shorten the expense of ... But then pay off noise that will ruin the photo. Therefore, always shoot at the minimum ISO. Even advanced SLR "noise" in the more than 600 ISO, and so compact and cheap SLR noise at ISO 200. a As an example, here is the "Photo # 2997: Polyommatus coelestina" shot with an exposure of 1/3 seconds.

Eugene, I have nothing protiv.Deystvitelno, at dawn, when it dawns, -for shooting with fast shutter speeds without a tripod can not do, and long too. But I'm not about that. Speaking of the early morning, I mean the time when it was light, but the sun has not yet got out of the horizon or raise low. In the summer, in time, it is somewhere between 6 am to 10 am.Illumination is enough, especially in open areas and shooting with fast shutter speeds can already be. With shutter speeds the wind is no longer an obstacle, the movement of a butterfly, too, is not a hindrance, objects do not have a tripod and smazhutsya or not, it does not affect the quality of shooting.I just wanted to say, and there is no need to constantly carry a tripod, if you are going to shoot in the gloom.

And about the "requirements" - painfully, we are liberal. Well, can not be placed online photo absolutely no quality. Here is an example http://lepidoptera.ru/gallery/23978. What you can see here, TB "kind of undefined"

Eugene, now just barely goes removal ph since forward povleniya bindings to Google Maps and separation of photons at the primary and secondary (which are for illustrative purposes only points). How it will be - a lot ph will be transferred to Perm. section, and I think about 300-500 pieces altogether removed.This is the picture you deleted right now, it really did not see, but there is no definition, and obviously will not be.

Peter, you're nothing for me delete the photo, there is in fact a couple of them, the upper side and lower, you remove the bottom, and maybe it is species-specific? race very difficult, but not hopeless, and the butterfly can be determined for certain, stand some degree of accuracy. Return please, I'll try to dig. :)

Alexander, I removed both and there is a suspicion meet: -)

Peter, always leave room on the third head of the butterfly.
This time, clearly trying to cut so that the free space in front of the head remained.
All images with the flash, by the way)
(http://lepidoptera.ru/gallery/25158)

Shamil, in my opinion, it is currently an adequate crop of these photons, well, the place to head there.

10.11.2013 2:03, Yuri Semeykin ... With respect to the tripod-nation removes and eliminates bad, mainly telephoto. But then again, butterflies in my small they did not withdraw, and then look in the scene where she is.
Hats telephoto Sigma 400 / 5.6 APO Tele Macro and Sigma 300/4 APO Tele Macro. They are honest psevdomakro 1: 2.5. Ie Large Butterfly takes about half of the frame, which is a matrix D800e quite well.MDF these telephoto 160 and 120cm respectively. From this distance, especially without disturbing the butterfly, you can almost always guaranteed to make the shot.

Vladimir, Yuri meant small butterflies. Where the scale of 1: 2.5 - it does not scale: -) In general, I do both hands dlinnofokusniki (if nemelochi).

25.09.2014 17:32, Petr Khramov Yuri meant small butterflies. ...
Two walnut - a lot, or a bunch? (from).
This butterfly:
http://lepidoptera.ru/gallery/33655
fine or not fine? It also removed 400 / 5.6 to 1: 2.5.

It's not small, the quality is very average, just kind of a very specific, it any more does not seem to be so determined, even in silhouette. :)

25.09.2014 19:23, Alexander Zhakov: It is not small, the quality is very average ... Lada, next season I will try to pull a more makrik and 1: 1.
... To see these are not small.

http://lepidoptera.ru/gallery/29102
that's fine. makrik 1: 1, sprinkled on the Canon 90mm, ie effective 135mm; further cropped.

Alexander, and that there is not the quality? Normally all the same. Wings only partially blur gone, but that's really a problem specific frame, rather than bundles of lens / camera in general.
And yes, for very small companions (especially when shooting flown to light) 1: 1 is needed cropped.Just cut further, and electronic publishing will be of sufficient size image.
Once again, Vladimir will support over long telephoto: yes sprinkled on the stub at the diaphragm with 4300 mm lens a very useful thing for butterflies, starting with the size of the hive. With the built-in flash includingYou can shoot a very good kind of hectic, to which a 100 mm makrikom get close is very napryazhno.
Although after I took Fudge, who generally do not have interchangeable lenses (and not particularly macro mode), the mirror approach is no desire at all was gone ... Strange, I was a staunch zerkalschikom until this year to 95, probably.

26.09.2014 20:17, Petr Khramov: Although after I took Fudge, who generally do not have interchangeable lenses (and not particularly macro mode), the desire to approach the mirror no not at all was ...
Yes-ah like. It would be nice to walk only with Fujiko. But apart from butterflies to birds and marshes still it would be nice to catch.That's drag with a second camera with a 500mm offtopnymi.

But I do not like very dlinnofokusniki. Very often, the object is sitting in the grass, bushes, etc., and the longer the directress, the greater the probability of getting it stems, leaves, and other things. And from a short distance, they are not focused. And I have not ever met an object that can not be removed from the 5-10 cm.Already horses at noon to 3 cm can be removed, and the butterfly is much more simple macro. The only thing where dlinnofokusnik amiss - when the object is sitting high up in the branches, the trunk.

Sun. Glade. Swallowtail. Flit from flower to flower. Each delayed for a few seconds, or even less. And the flowers, on which he sits, are not so close to each other. To get close to a 5-10 cm (yes though and 50), is just not enough time. Puglyuchest object reserve behind the scenes - it just scared we did not have time.But the herb may interfere with - yes. Here it is one which objects to whom does not suffice. I now usually lacked focus, rather than interfere with branches. Plus FF on a long DOF though not changed in comparison with the rather short, but visually in a picture object from the background a little more separated, and therefore the effect of herbs (including the front of the object) becomes a little less.

Peter. And you can throw a small video of butterflies - 30-35 MB?

Alexander, I poured on youtube and then link to the signed photo in the comment field.

Video will implement it through SYNC with youtube.

Focus is on the wing instead of in the head or abdomen when shooting macro acquitted on 100% .If filming Doxocop flash spoils the color reproduction, changing to blue zelenyy.Odnoznachno needed here filming without flash, but ostalnom- rented with vspyshkoy.Chem closer object a sheet of paper, the less shade!

Focus on the eyes. The recording studio is almost always possible to stretch the DOF and the wings, especially with the standard angle. Color reproduction in the time of the configuration port numbers BB, while normal flash BB just close to the natural "estesstvenno." The closer the object to the sheet of paper - the darker the shade, though smaller in size.The people of the opposite happens very far from the background object assigns to the shadows and the blurred background would not hurt. And in general - often (though not always kanesh) look towards black background.

It was not about color reproduction as a whole, how would it be right to say the transfer of the color iridescent wing sections doksokop.Pri outbreak of refraction only in the direction of green, it does not change the position kamery.Za take advice from a sheet of paper and adjust -spasibo.Uzhe made soon oprobuyu.BB on the machine-Nikon cope

A. Well, with iridescent, with them, yes. They fear and terror. Et like chrome any thread to shoot, and sometimes even worse. However, in a studio can always score at the flash and delivery blunt object to the window, or even to any such light.

With the play of all the problems I do not see. Standard cone or cylinder made of paper / plastic, inside the object and light soft box of sufficient size - the effect of daylight will. And if the TTL in general almost nothing is set up. Well, the angle of the flash may add a bit overflows. But not so scary)
While yes, daylight easier.You do not need dancing with a tambourine :)

Exactly. "I do not see any problems" and "standard cone or cylinder made of paper / plastic, inside the object and light soft box of sufficient size" slightly contradict each other: -)

there is somewhere in the post, which bonded with the cylinders of the paper tests for drop shadows when photographing butterflies.
good at it. everything is done for about 5 minutes.

I shot so - Left light from the window on the right white screen reflector. Top twisted spit-turned-ist. directional light (lantern LDS) and highlight the best hit (overflow color and brightness) Press the descent. Camera EFTA-but on a tripod. The distance from the paper - length of the needle (not paper and Styrofoam, it is still very absorbs and scatters light).

Found about bonded with cylinders of paper: http://lepidoptera.ru/gallery/28541. Peter, comments can be a "vyrezaykami" here to copy / move?