popcorn


Status
Not open for further replies.

empty123

New Member
Oct 26, 2008
3
0
0
#1
i am just starting to play around with my kit lens and decided to take a picture of this before i ate it :) please comment on the exposure/composition/saturation.

here's the metadata:
canon eos 40d + 18-55mm IS
Exposure Time: 1/15 sec.
Aperture Value: 4.38 EV (f/4.6)
ISO Speed Rating: 400
Flash Fired: Flash fired, compulsory flash mode.
Metering Mode: Spot
Exposure Program: Aperture priority
Focal Length: 36.0 mm

i am trying to generate my own custom style settings for macro photography so i would appreciate your comments/suggestions.

thanks!



more photos at http://mybeaglemeg.multiply.com/
 

Last edited:

PyeeL

New Member
Sep 3, 2008
606
0
0
26
#2
I see a plane of focus but it seems blur. Probably not well focused.
The composition is there, I see your attempt in placing it by the Rule of Thirds. But I feel that your plane of focus could be brought forward slightly such that the larger pieces of popcorns could be seen. Otherwise, close down the aperture by a little probably. That might do fine for me.
 

empty123

New Member
Oct 26, 2008
3
0
0
#3
hi,

actually i made several attempts, here's the other one:



do you think this is better in terms of the focus location? i have tried to force it to a smaller aperture but sometimes it wouldn't focus (maybe due to the low-light situation, and also maybe i should have used a tripod)? i will practice some more.

thanks for the tip!
 

PyeeL

New Member
Sep 3, 2008
606
0
0
26
#4
Yes, I prefer the 2nd. And yes again, you could try pushing up the F number.
 

lordpain

Senior Member
Feb 22, 2007
949
0
16
#5
not being able to focus may be because u are focusing too close to the subject. check the min focusing distance of the lens. =)
 

tjhan

New Member
Feb 11, 2007
448
0
0
#6
For food photography, you might wish to use a larger DOF.
 

Jul 14, 2007
1,291
0
0
600060
#7
Must've been those caramel pop corns? Normal pop corns are more yellowish.
1- The crop doesnt work for me. I would rather have some space on top; with some crop at the side.
2- Fact that pop corns are not in any particular shape, so having close ups doesnt quite tell anything.
3- Perhaps given point 1, plus a movie ticket/s besides it, may help in the composition. Pop corn stand alone could be done much better, but not in the way you did it.
 

lastboltnut

Senior Member
Mar 23, 2006
4,528
0
0
Where the wind blows...
#9
For the 1st pic, like someone already mentioned, there is a plane of focus, but its still blur, so I guess its handshake, since its clear that the middle part must be in focus. But the placement of the focus plane is not very good, the focus plane is placed on a recess of the "pile" of corns and those corns in the recess are all in small bits and pieces, there is no one big corn in the plane....so its not doing justice to the corns.

The send pic is better as there are chunky corn in the focus plane.

For composition, I find the negative space is too much. If the container is one without the side wall, we can see more full round corns, the side wall is covering the corns.

Thats my personal opinion and feel if you would like to collect more views to create your own style.:)
 

lastboltnut

Senior Member
Mar 23, 2006
4,528
0
0
Where the wind blows...
#10
I would say its up to the feel of the pic...like those you see in Mac/Burger King, they use small aperture to get the entire pic sharp. This technique is generally more appealing to the older generations who love to see the entire presentation of the food they are buying, so its very common seen in Hawker Centers and coffee shops.

For those upper class, modern restaurants who are wooing the younger upper class people, they will tend to isolate the close up food with shallow DOF.

Anyway, these are just broad sense of it and everyone is free to break the rule. So I think there is no hard rule about which is better.:)

For food photography, you might wish to use a larger DOF.
Larger? Meaning more blur?
 

Last edited:

empty123

New Member
Oct 26, 2008
3
0
0
#11
hey thanks for your comments! i'll try out some of the stuff suggested. i guess i should really try to develop my own style (after i have mastered the camera controls, that is). and yes, it's a caramel popcorn, not the normal ones. i prefer the sweet caramel popcorns :bsmilie:
 

lastboltnut

Senior Member
Mar 23, 2006
4,528
0
0
Where the wind blows...
#12
Hope they are useful to you. :)
hey thanks for your comments! i'll try out some of the stuff suggested. i guess i should really try to develop my own style (after i have mastered the camera controls, that is). and yes, it's a caramel popcorn, not the normal ones. i prefer the sweet caramel popcorns :bsmilie:
 

tjhan

New Member
Feb 11, 2007
448
0
0
#13
I would say its up to the feel of the pic...like those you see in Mac/Burger King, they use small DOF to get the entire pic sharp. This technique is generally more appealing to the older generations who love to see the entire presentation of the food they are buying, so its very common seen in Hawker Centers and coffee shops.

For those upper class, modern restaurants who are wooing the younger upper class people, they will tend to isolate the close up food with shallow DOF.

Anyway, these are just broad sense of it and everyone is free to break the rule. So I think there is no hard rule about which is better.:)
You do realise when someone says "larger depth of field" he means having more of the photo sharp right? Shallow Depth of field is having bokeh as you said, so larger is having less bokeh...
 

lastboltnut

Senior Member
Mar 23, 2006
4,528
0
0
Where the wind blows...
#14
Oops, sorry I meant smaller aperture but I typed as smaller DOF. Anyway, I was saying that there is no fixed way of shooting food.;) Thanks for pointing out and I will edit my previous post to prevent misleading others.

You do realise when someone says "larger depth of field" he means having more of the photo sharp right? Shallow Depth of field is having bokeh as you said, so larger is having less bokeh...
 

munkey

New Member
Apr 25, 2007
448
0
0
32
#15
2nd photo is underexposed by half a stop, fyi. Try putting it by the window for natural lighting and shoot in RAW, adjust the WB later. It certainly works much better than the direct flash. Also shoot with larger aperture.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom