That's how some people call their backyard, because, if it's like mine, it offers a lot of possibilities for a decent shot with a macro lens.
Now, let's cut to the chase. These are macros, done with my Nikon D700, and while all of them are, say, reasonably decent, there's a postprocessing aspect that stumps me. However, let's begin by the beginning.
My macro lens is a Sigma AF 105 f2.8, purchased in the summer of 2005. It's seen a lot of work ever since. And, in fact, it's perpetually equipped with an 812 Tiffen filter. Will that explain the wonderful tonality of these photographs?
Just kidding...
That thing above is the lonely, single petal of a sunflower. The plants in our yard are about 8 feet tall... and that makes the flowers a bit difficult to photograph. The one above is a rare case of low bloom, and instead of doing the boring and overused top, frontal shot, I chose a less boring and overused petal contrasting with the sky. They have an abstract quality about them that makes them perfect for cards.
Summer wouldn't be complete without tomatoes. We have a happy crop here... and we better hurry to pick these ones (photographed with the above mentioned Sigma lens at f9) The odd thing I've learned with macro is that a smaller aperture rarely means a large DOF. Somehow, I figured out that long lenses do not really cast a sharp focus zone the same way wide angles do, and also that DOF operates in a much more generous way the further the subject is placed. Hence, despite the small aperture, there's some fuzziness about the second and third tomatoes.
But they do taste great...
Now, this lonely guy represents a problem. Take a peek at it, click on the image and you'll see an obscene amount of posterization on the right side of the shot, right where I want the bokeh to show its beauty.
How does this happen? I have no clue...
Usually, after downloading images, I work a little on levels and exposure, then use the Photoshop Elements function "Save for web." This one has the very unexpected effect of enlarging the dimensions of the file (if originally it is, say, 5 inches, after this function it will be 15 inches long). The way I change that, so as not to post outrageously large files on galleries, is that I open the file's dimensions, and reduce the largest one by at least two thirds (we're talking inches, here, not pixels). I thought I had it down pat... until today, when this little bugger baffled me.
What to do? I will appreciate suggestions. Thanks in advance!