# Differently focused



## NateS (Aug 3, 2010)

Silver Spotted Skipper

I almost hit delete on this one but the more I look at it, I think it is kind of a cool selective focus on the feeding portion of the butterfly.  I'll be interested to see if others think I should have hit delete or not.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 3, 2010)

Keep it. The feeding portion is called the proboscis. I think it's pretty cool how the proboscis goes into tiny petals and slurps out nectar. And how it rolls up, like a firehose coiled in one of those old-school style wall-mounted glass fire cases!


----------



## pbelarge (Aug 3, 2010)

It is interesting and different.

Also, do not delete it, in a few years there will probably be a program available to correct blurry portions of photos.


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Aug 4, 2010)

Totally agree, definitely a keeper.  The tones really make it work IMO.

 Ive completely stopped chimping on macro stuff.  Its just too hard to tell whats going to look interesting until you get it up on a decent monitor.


----------



## ltlredwagon (Aug 5, 2010)

Okay, I'm a noob, but, sorry, I gotta throw down my 2 cents on this one, Nate, especially after seeing a slew of stunning images on your website:  screw what others "think" about whether or not its a keeper.  That's your decision, your art, your integrity.  I would never ask anyone that question - "should I delete it?" - again.  Period.  That question is dangerously close to "do you like my photo?  do you like my music?  do you like my writing?,does Bob Dylan have a good voice?, etc., etc., and that's a road - just my opinion - no artist should ever walk down.  

The art world sometimes creates the _apparency_ that approval or permission or agreement is needed.  (The world of science has a similar flaw - did it matter how many people agreed with Copernicus that the Earth was not the center of our universe?)  It's just a control mechanism:  "Ahem, well, yes, Nicky, but the earth is still the center of the universe until *The Academy* decides otherwise."  "If I were you, Joe, I'd go and shoot another 4 - 5,000 frames and then take your best 5 shots and submit them to a juried exibition and see if you're accepted, and if you are then keep doing that and in a few decades you may get some honors and then you might be able to get a local gallery to take your work and after you're dead there's a chance your descendants may receive the acknowledgment and reward you so richly deserve."  No.  If it meets _your_ standards and communicates effectively by _your_ decision (even if the shot was taken when you stumbled and accidentally tripped the shutter), then that's all that's important.  

Now, technical expertise?  That's an entirely different matter.  "How do I eliminate/lessen this shadow?  How do I get ALL of this in focus and still leave what's just behind out of focus?  What lighting technique works best for this situation?  I don't like this about my photo - what could I do differently?"  Ask away.  And certainly listen to technical data:  "you could increase contrast by doing X which would make Y stand out a bit more";  fine - that's a technical datum which you can apply (if you want Y to stand out a bit more) or reject (if you don't).  How different is this from:  "Your photo doesn't have adequate contrast".  Well, I don't care if that opinion comes from the worlds most renowned macro photographer - it's an opinion and nothing else.

Okay, I'll get off my soapbox.


----------



## NateS (Aug 6, 2010)

ltlredwagon said:


> Okay, I'm a noob, but, sorry, I gotta throw down my 2 cents on this one, Nate, especially after seeing a slew of stunning images on your website:  screw what others "think" about whether or not its a keeper.  That's your decision, your art, your integrity.  I would never ask anyone that question - "should I delete it?" - again.  Period.  That question is dangerously close to "do you like my photo?  do you like my music?  do you like my writing?,does Bob Dylan have a good voice?, etc., etc., and that's a road - just my opinion - no artist should ever walk down.
> 
> The art world sometimes creates the _apparency_ that approval or permission or agreement is needed.  (The world of science has a similar flaw - did it matter how many people agreed with Copernicus that the Earth was not the center of our universe?)  It's just a control mechanism:  "Ahem, well, yes, Nicky, but the earth is still the center of the universe until *The Academy* decides otherwise."  "If I were you, Joe, I'd go and shoot another 4 - 5,000 frames and then take your best 5 shots and submit them to a juried exibition and see if you're accepted, and if you are then keep doing that and in a few decades you may get some honors and then you might be able to get a local gallery to take your work and after you're dead there's a chance your descendants may receive the acknowledgment and reward you so richly deserve."  No.  If it meets _your_ standards and communicates effectively by _your_ decision (even if the shot was taken when you stumbled and accidentally tripped the shutter), then that's all that's important.
> 
> ...



Well, I guess I will disagree.  In areas "known" to me, I would never ask such a question, but this image stepped out of the box a lot and delved into an area of unkown for myself.  Can such a small portion of the image being in focus work?  Is the proboscis an important enough element to be the only part in focus?  These are questions that I was unsure about.  Musicians that write new songs usually have other people that tell them...."no that course doesn't sound right".

I know how I feel about the image now....now that I've had some time to step back and re-look...what I don't know is whether this image appeals to anybody but myself.....just like a song may not appeal to anybody but the artist.  If that's the case, the artist wouldn't put it on his album and would keep the song for himself.  I can't decide whether or not to put it on my site at this point...

My original delete comments were due to the fact that I had hit delete, but then paused and hit no when it asked for confirmation.  If you re-read my first post, I already stated that I thought the image was a keeper...for me at least....my comment of "interested to see if other's thought I should have hit delete" was to imply that I"m interested to see if other's enjoy this image which is frankly extremely unconventional.  I never asked people to decide if it should be deleted.


----------



## NateS (Aug 6, 2010)

Derrel said:


> Keep it. The feeding portion is called the proboscis. I think it's pretty cool how the proboscis goes into tiny petals and slurps out nectar. And how it rolls up, like a firehose coiled in one of those old-school style wall-mounted glass fire cases!



Thanks Derrel...I knew what the proboscis was and that's what I thought made it interesting.  Accident or not, you don't see many photos drawing complete attention to the proboscis.



pbelarge said:


> It is interesting and different.
> 
> Also, do not delete it, in a few years there will probably be a program available to correct blurry portions of photos.



Thanks Pierre.



Arkanjel Imaging said:


> Totally agree, definitely a keeper.  The tones really make it work IMO.
> 
> Ive completely stopped chimping on macro stuff.  Its just too hard to tell whats going to look interesting until you get it up on a decent monitor.



Thanks AI.  Appreciate the comments/opinions.


----------



## ltlredwagon (Aug 6, 2010)

Well, I'm glad you disagree.  Don't mind my rants - just a button for me - I've seen a few budding artists blunted by "expert" opinions and weakened in the personal development of their craft by "expert" evaluations, solicited and unsolicited.  Love your work.


----------



## NateS (Aug 6, 2010)

ltlredwagon said:


> Well, I'm glad you disagree.  Don't mind my rants - just a button for me - I've seen a few budding artists blunted by "expert" opinions and weakened in the personal development of their craft by "expert" evaluations, solicited and unsolicited.  Love your work.



Thank you and I actually do appreciate your post.  I agree that it is important to not let yourself be blunted artistically, but with me, the final decision I always make myself.  Always nice to get opinions from others that have a good eye though.


----------



## supraman215 (Aug 6, 2010)

I have taken 5000 pictures of my daughter in the 1.5 years I've owned my DSLR, doesn't count the 1.5 years before when I had just a P&S. This is too many, by the time she's 10 i'll have 20k. When I go back in time and I want to reminise about the great times I had with my daughter and what a cute kid she was I'm going to have a lot of trouble wadding through so many pictures. Should it be 100, no, but it should be some number that is within human reason lol. So what I do to determine if I should keep a picture is "is it the best of the best" meaning, looking forward in time is this picture going to be one that I want to remember, a picture that will stand out. Obviously this is a very personal thing. This is just how I try to do it. From what I've seen of your work on this site you are an outstanding photographer, your macro shots are beautiful. You have set the bar and expectation very high. This is not one of yours that will stand out in my head. But there are plenty that will. If I took this picture I'd be psyched but from what I've seen of your work it's not a standout. Just my $0.02.


----------



## NateS (Aug 6, 2010)

supraman215 said:


> I have taken 5000 pictures of my daughter in the 1.5 years I've owned my DSLR, doesn't count the 1.5 years before when I had just a P&S. This is too many, by the time she's 10 i'll have 20k. When I go back in time and I want to reminise about the great times I had with my daughter and what a cute kid she was I'm going to have a lot of trouble wadding through so many pictures. Should it be 100, no, but it should be some number that is within human reason lol. So what I do to determine if I should keep a picture is "is it the best of the best" meaning, looking forward in time is this picture going to be one that I want to remember, a picture that will stand out. Obviously this is a very personal thing. This is just how I try to do it. From what I've seen of your work on this site you are an outstanding photographer, your macro shots are beautiful. You have set the bar and expectation very high. This is not one of yours that will stand out in my head. But there are plenty that will. If I took this picture I'd be psyched but from what I've seen of your work it's not a standout. Just my $0.02.



Oh, I agree...it's far from one of my best....THANK GOODNESS.  This shot was an accident and I would be very depressed if the shot that was among my best was not because of my skill but merely an accident.  I still think it's a neat perspective...almost abstract that is worth keeping.

As all, I continue to grow and get better as months go on....this will make it to my site, but probably will eventually get removed as many of my shot once better shots come in to replace them...I try to only have my best on my site which means I'm constantly removing pictures of Katydid's and replacing them with better katydid shots...same with butterflies, etc...

Thanks for your comments and compliments Supraman...they truly are appreciated.


----------

