Macro Field Trip Image Critique – Bob R.
Interesting and challenging subject.
The slightest breeze can move the web and cause movement blur. This image seems to be photographed with an appropriate shutter speed to ensure there is no movement.
The image is well focused.
Aperture controls depth of field, and depth of field can help or ruin an otherwise well thought out photograph.
The choice of depth of field for this shot is appropriate.
We are taught that the least interesting location to place the subject is in the center of the frame. This image demonstrates how that rule can be broken. The web effectively draws the viewer to the center of the image to the subject, and there is a sense of balance with this subject placed in the center.
There is a feel of movement and/or weight in photographs. For animals/insects, without other indicators like leading lines, the movement or weight follows the head.
With the spider’s head below center, does this image feel weighted towards the bottom?
The image also “feels” flat.
Compare the side by side visual critique.
Did the additional processing improve the image?
Does the new crop and processing change the feel and weight of the subject?
Notice the new crop placed the head (instead of the body) of the spider in the center, eliminated some of the unnecessary background and highlights at the top of the image, moved the horizontal elements closer to the top of the frame, and fills the frame with the spider.
Macro Field Trip Image Critique-Bradley E.
The original image is on the left, visual critique on the right.
Image is well composed and waiting for the tentacle/eye on the right to fall within the edges of the shell was a good choice. The viewer's eye tends to start at the bright part of the shell and follows the shell to the right and the edge; the tentacle brings the viewer back to the snail's body.
The background creates a soft palette and is appropriate for this type of image.
The exposure seems appropriate, but the image could benefit from a little processing (lightening, darkening, contrast).
In general, it is a good practice to ensure that the closest part of the subject, to the viewer, is in focus. The tentacle on the left side of the frame is the closest part and it is a little soft.
The entire image could have used a little sharpening too.
Compare the side-by-side visual critique.
Do you notice a difference in the processing?
Did the contrast help?
Does the image have a different feel when the tentacle on the left is in focus? (Look at it close. Can you see how I did it?) Hint: it started as the other one ...
There was one other subtle change-can you find it?
Finally, look at the bottom, back side of the shell. The original looks like it had a very well done selection when processing. A hard edge selection can seem 2D or flat. In the visual critique on the right; do the shadows seem to fall off a little more naturally and consistent with the lighting?
Summing it up-As a general rule, keep the closest parts of the subject to the viewer in focus. All images require sharpening and it should be done after the image is sized. All images need some form of processing.
Macro Field Trip Image Critique – Hugh H.
The image is simple (simple is good) and the drop of water adds interest to the shot, making the viewer look deeper to see what is being reflected. This is a great example of seeing what is there, and looking for what else is there. These hidden elements add interest to a photograph.
The background creates a soft palette and is appropriate for this type of image.
The exposure seems appropriate.
Look close at the subject and you will notice that it is soft/out of focus. This could be the result of hand-holding the camera or a slow shutter-speed, and slight movement from the wind. If it was aperture causing the out of focus feel, shifting the orientation so the subject was parallel with the sensor would help. Either way, this shot would have benefited from closer attention to photographic techniques to improve sharpness.
Selective processing would have enhanced the water drop to make it stand out, and emphasize the reflection.
Compare the side-by-side visual critique.
• Did enhancing the water drop help?
• Did brightening and adding contrast to the background help?
• Is the background consistent with the enhanced water drop?
If the water drop is important to the image; does the tighter crop (I kept the same 4x5 ratio as the original) help? The new crop also pulled the drop farther from the edge and closer to a power point.
In my mind, the tighter crop helps the water drop but hurts the overall composition. It seems to me the vine/branch entering the frame from the top is important to the feel of the hanging water drop.
Summing it up – Critical focus and selective processing are the two main things to consider for improving this shot.