| Macro Lighting |
|
|
|
| Written by Cyrus Khamak | |
| Friday, 06 July 2007 | |
|
My friend, Brian-D posted the following topic elsewhere and I thought it would make a good reading for other interested Macro shooters:
" This season I think I've improved my macro photography quite a bit. One thing that still bugs me is lighting. Most of the macros in the field in my stream are only shot at f/8 - f/11. I cannot for the life of me get shots at f/16 without being VERY underexposed. This is with a Big Nikon SB800 only about 5-6 inches from subject. Even with another SB600 thrown in at equal distance doesn't help much. I've reduced "hot spots" with Lord V's coke can diffuser. Now I want to focus on smooth lighting with decent DOF. I really don't want to crank up the ISO but it seems that's my only option. Even though I've seen photos taken at f/16 ISO 100 with a single flash perfectly exposed using the same diffuser as mine. I was looking at Cyrus's "mega bee" shot and wondering how you got that DOF and smooth lighting. What type of diffuser was used? Flash position and distance? You can barely tell a flash was used in that photo. I'd like to see a photo of your macro setup just to get an idea." 
Trackback(0)
Comments (9)
  written by cyrus, July 06, 2007  written by BrianD, July 06, 2007
I usually cap off my ISO at 200 any more than that and I don't like the grain. So usually ISO 160 or 200. Depending on where I'm shooting and background distance occasionally I can drop to ISO 100 and 125.
I LOVE the way they look at ISO 500 but I shouldn't have to reach that far in sensitivity for a nice balanced shot. I noticed your Red eyed tree frog was taken at iso 800 in the raw conversion tutorial, which I have been practicing using the saturation and hue sliders. Are all your shots taken at higher ISO? That would make life a lot easier but I worry about loss of details and highlights start to act funny. written by cyrus, July 06, 2007
Brian,
First on the ISO issue. You have heard me say in numerous occasion to move to a higher ISO if you have to.and will maintain the same position once more. Look at it this way and it's so easy to stop down to a much higher F stop: Let's say you were at ISO 200 at F11. Now, at ISO 400 you'll be at F16 and at ISO 800, at F22, right where you'd want to be for certain subjects where you don't care much about little diffraction. I, on the other hand, often move up to a much higher ISO. The image below was taken at ISO 2000, yes ISO 2000 and at F18 and I don't think it looks bad for a tuff subject as a black bee. If moving to a higher ISO such as 800 is not working for you then there other areas which you may want to explore, maybe our processing methods or even our equipments are not producing the same results.  ...Now, Brian, this is where it get much more interesting. This shot was about two stops underexposed which means that effectively, it's at ISO 8,000 !!! To get more shadow detail, I did another conversion and exposed it even more and guess where that will take you in terms of ISO equivalent. Here's a screen shot of this shot and see for yourself. Also notice that the noise level is pretty much low, it is for me anyway.  So, there is no magic and I'm NOT hiding anything. I'll even make the raw file available for you or anyone else who'd be interested to examine the file for him or herself. . "I really don't want to crank up the ISO but it seems that's my only option. Even though I've seen photos taken at f/16 ISO 100 with a single flash perfectly exposed using the same diffuser as mine." . I don't see why you are having a problem to stop down to F16 with one flash. According to the rule of Sunny 16, you should be able to, on a sunny day, get a shutter speed of 1/100 at ISO 100, exposing a subject with an overall tonality of a medium gray or brighter, doing regular photography. With Macro, I can stop down to F16 with NO flash at ISO 800 or even 400, let alone ISO 2000 or above. . On the question of Mega Bee, I'm planing to discus that shot at some point but for now, I'll say it again, a lot of work has gone into that shot and several conversions have been made for different exposures . On the question of the lighting set up, I HAVE NOT hidden any of my methods from you or anybody else, although it's my right to do so. Like I said to you before, the only thing which I'd like to wait a bit longer to indulge in, is my lighting set up which, if it works out, I'd like to make it commercially available. In the meantime, it's not much different than what you are using. I hope I have been clear and helpful. Still, please don't hesitate to indulge in further discussions if you feel you'd like to do so. Cyrus written by BrianD, July 06, 2007
I forgot to mention that my shots are wild shots as seen in nature for 99% of my insect macros. Meaning tripods are out of the question. I have recently purchased a monopod which has been helping, but I still find it somewhat limiting my shots.
Anyways the point is I shoot at Sync speed on the D80 (1/200th) I don't let any ambient light in the shot. Recently I've been letting a little trickle in with the monopod. I just have to watch for camera shake with my setup almost equal to a 300mm lens with all the goodies on it. My flash usually always pops full power even on f/9. Since that is a 1/1000 flash of light that acts like my shutter, it shouldn't matter where I set my shutter speed beyond trying to cut ambient light out. I'm doing some shots tonight of beetles so I can try out different techniques that I get rushed on in the field. I'll try higher Iso and post the results. I appreciate your help written by cyrus, July 06, 2007
Brian,
The vast majority of my shots are in the field as well, either there or my insect friendly back yard! Like I have said before, my office room windows are open all the time and some insects such as Mega Bee II who get into my office, then I may have a cjance to shoot them there as well. But still, when going out in the field, I do still carry some colored paperswith mehttp://megashot.net/component/...Itemid,58/ It is easy sometimes to use them, specially shooting certain insects. On the issue of ambient light, I know almost everyone wants to kill them but I live on them. I even create the impression of ambient light in my conversion if I don't originally have it in the shot. written by cyrus, July 07, 2007
Here's another shot which shows that improving shooting techniques and reducing hand shakes can be the biggest tool on your bag. It was shot on an overcast day, hand held at 1/30 and I was able to go as high as F19 with pretty sharp detail in the file.
  written by Robert Seber, July 07, 2007
You use a lighting setup? Interesting! I thought that you were an ambient light only man.
written by cyrus, July 07, 2007
Robert,
I have never said anywhere that I'm an ambient light shooter only. Even at places I have discussed one of my lighting set up. For 1:1 macros, I DO NOT use and don not need artificial lighting, even some 2:1. At these magnifications a bright overcast day, high ISO(if needed) and slow shutter speeds are my friends. What I have said however is that even when I do use artificial light, I won't kill the ambient light, something that I see others suggest to do-I use as much of the ambient light as I can. Like I said, on an overcast day I drop everything to shoot Macro and that's the way it goes for me. The shot like the one below for instance, I could never get it on a sunny day.  Shot at 2007-07-07 written by Dalantech, July 09, 2007
Hmmm... maybe I can help. I frequently shoot with and without a flash, and at a variety of Fstops and ISOs. If you do not have enough light from your flash to properly expose an image then either the angle of the flash is wrong (not pointed at the subject), the diffuser is blocking too much light, you don't have the flash close enough to the subject, or there is something about your setup that is causing problems for your light meter. Most cameras cause the flash to send out a small pre-burst of light that's used for metering. It's possible that your flash is pointed at the lens (directly or indirectly) and that pre-flash is causing the camera to under expose (because it's going directly into the lens instead of bouncing off of the subject). I recently had the same problem shooting at 4 and 5 times life size with an MPE-65 and a set of Sto-Fen diffusers on an MT-24EX macro flash. At high magnification the working distance for that lens is less than two inches and I had to point the flash heads toward the lens as far as they would go. Since the Sto-Fen's stick out from the flash heads some of the pre-flash that was used for metering was getting directly into the lens and my shots were under-exposed. My solution is this: http://nocroppingzone.blogspot...fuser.html
As for the "sunny 16" rule: It does not apply to macro photography. It works great if you are shooting a wide angle scenic, but at life size magnification the amount of light coming through the lens is reduced by two stops. So shooting at 1:1 and F16 you're effective aperture is really somewhere around F32... Write comment
|
|
| Last Updated ( Saturday, 07 July 2007 ) |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Yes, your Macros have improved quite a bit this season and you should be proud of your work.
I was going to try to be able to answer you better but I could not find the exif on your recent photos.
would you please first tell me at what ISO you are shooting.
Originally posted 17 hours ago. ( permalink | edit | delete )