AP Volcano


virus530

New Member
Oct 3, 2008
316
0
0
North Singapore
#1
Trying out some micro shoot with my 105mm.
CC are welcome to help me improve.
1)


2)


3)


4)


5)


I would like to find out which is preferred between 1 and 3.
 

Valjean

New Member
Jul 25, 2006
595
0
0
Far East
www.flickr.com
#2
Great watch! I think 2 with a wider crop would be nice, but the DOF for all 3 shots appears to be too shallow, resulting in some indices/hands being blurred and detracts from the shot. You may also wish to consider posing the hands in the classic 10:10 time. For this watch, perhaps I could suggest a red backdrop? :)
 

virus530

New Member
Oct 3, 2008
316
0
0
North Singapore
#3
Thanks for your comment.
Somehow when I have deeper Depth of Field, the feeling wasnt right as I felt. Maybe everything is too clear.

As for the Back drop, maybe will give it a try.. :)

As for the 10:10, in fact thats when I started. This is my first time doing this, thus experimenting different light source. As you can see number 3 started with 10:10.
There after Lazy to tune the watch every now and then.

As for Number 1, there is finger print on the glass.
 

Last edited:

SiaOLiaO

New Member
Aug 12, 2007
71
0
0
#4
I think for such a close shot, you need to be more careful with the dust specks. Doesn't look too nice with them.
And I agree with Valjean that the DOF is too shallow, I think watch lovers would want to see each individual details on the watch, not just the brand.

Just my two cents. thanks!
 

virus530

New Member
Oct 3, 2008
316
0
0
North Singapore
#5
Thanks for your comment,

I will try to take another round with deeper DOF and compare to see if its nicer.
As for the Spec of dust, been using a blower to blow them off...maybe my hoouse too dusty.
And yes I do agree that the spec of dust does look not too pleasant.
 

bubble2k

New Member
Nov 23, 2009
108
0
0
#6
I think #2 is nice. As for choosing between #1 and #3, i feel #3 is better. I think the placement of the hands do play a part. Also, I prefer slightly shallower DOF, cos it gives more depth to the object, but that's just me. :)
 

virus530

New Member
Oct 3, 2008
316
0
0
North Singapore
#7
I think #2 is nice. As for choosing between #1 and #3, i feel #3 is better. I think the placement of the hands do play a part. Also, I prefer slightly shallower DOF, cos it gives more depth to the object, but that's just me. :)
Thanks for your comment
 

nelson-tan

Senior Member
Apr 10, 2010
837
2
18
#12
A fellow watch lover? That's a nice AP by the way! :)

Some comments on the photography... you'd want to watch for the lighting on the bezel and the dial face. For the AP shots, to achieve the best effects, you'd need to capture the brushed steel of the bezel, as well as the textured dial surface. For that, you'd need to "feather" the lighting so that it drops off near the top of the watch where it's closest to the light, so that the brightest parts of the bezel not over exposed.

The first shot of the Seamaster is nice, but the dial is a bit flat. It takes practice (and Photoshop) to light both the dial and the watch nicely, so keep observing how lighting affects the photo. See how nicely your lights appear in the chronograph pushers? Take note of how you did it. In the third photo of your Seamaster, the reflection off the sapphire is distracting, so you might want to add a flag between the light source and the crystal to eliminate that.
 

virus530

New Member
Oct 3, 2008
316
0
0
North Singapore
#13
A fellow watch lover? That's a nice AP by the way! :)

Some comments on the photography... you'd want to watch for the lighting on the bezel and the dial face. For the AP shots, to achieve the best effects, you'd need to capture the brushed steel of the bezel, as well as the textured dial surface. For that, you'd need to "feather" the lighting so that it drops off near the top of the watch where it's closest to the light, so that the brightest parts of the bezel not over exposed.

The first shot of the Seamaster is nice, but the dial is a bit flat. It takes practice (and Photoshop) to light both the dial and the watch nicely, so keep observing how lighting affects the photo. See how nicely your lights appear in the chronograph pushers? Take note of how you did it. In the third photo of your Seamaster, the reflection off the sapphire is distracting, so you might want to add a flag between the light source and the crystal to eliminate that.
What do you mean by feather the light? Maybe give me an example so i can get what you mean somewhere along the line.

I try to drop the light off the top of the watch but then the light source will not be able to light up the dial the way I want it.
I guess I need the advice on how to "feather" the light source will solve my problem.
I try using light diffuser but still cant achieve the objective to take out the refection.
I try those shinning reflector also same. It will soften the ligth source but still create a refection.
I try not to use photo shop as I dont know how to use it.
 

Top Bottom