photography help - what's wrong with this picture?

[4tonmantis]

I try to photo with daylight and a flash with a softbox pointed 45 or higher. I like macro lenses too.

Here's an old photo I did.. I haven't taken pictures of anything recently but setting the white balance mode, using a tripod and a remote to minimize shaking, and a good flash and macro lens get your pretty far.

Edited May 17, 2016 by 4tonmantis

[Rob Dean]

So, for your next experiment, you might want to consider this: that shot has the out of focus background look indicating a relatively open aperture setting. You might like to try either using a background that doesn't -almost- look like something while out of focus, i.e. something more abstract and less like a tree, OR maximizing the depth lf field by closing down the aperture to the tightest setting and trying to get it in focus, which is more like the way our eyes would perceive the scene if we were 30mm tall.

 

You've got the white balance thing down....

[JDizzO]

@Guildenstern

 

I use my room light(regular light bulb) and two small lamps that came with a light box my wife gave me for Christmas.  While of course better lights will help, I think you would be pleasantly surprised just by changing the background to something other than white.  Grays work well from what I have read on the forums here.  Personally I printed a background I found with my Googlefoo and I tape it to my backdrop, since for some reason the light box didn't come with any neutrally colored back drops.

Edited May 17, 2016 by JDizzO

[Kheprera]

Note: Hancock Fabrics is closing. This means HUGE sales.

 

They sell OttLights.

[Doug Sundseth]

@4tonmantis:

 

The image you posted was lit primarily from high on camera left. The result is that the front of the figure and especially the camera left sides of both subjects are underexposed. Recommend using two lights of about the same power, one to either side of the subject, and moving the lights down so they shine directly on the front of the subject.

 

Also, what Rob Dean said about the background is dead on: The complex patterns of the OOF background are distracting from the subjects. A simpler background will work better.

 

If you really want a complex background, going to a small aperture is unlikely to help much when using a macro lens. The lens to subject distance is so much shorter than the lens to background distance that you probably can't get the background in any sort of focus while maintaining focus on the figure. To some extent, this can be mitigated by using a very short lens like the one in a cell phone, but even there, the difference in distances (and short distance to subject) will limit total depth of field.

[4tonmantis]

So, for your next experiment, you might want to consider this: that shot has the out of focus background look indicating a relatively open aperture setting. You might like to try either using a background that doesn't -almost- look like something while out of focus, i.e. something more abstract and less like a tree, OR maximizing the depth lf field by closing down the aperture to the tightest setting and trying to get it in focus, which is more like the way our eyes would perceive the scene if we were 30mm tall.

 

You've got the white balance thing down....

 

That's a macro lens.. that's how they take pictures..

[Rob Dean]

Must admit I don't own a macro lens...what focal length and highest aperture number have you got?

[4tonmantis]

Must admit I don't own a macro lens...what focal length and highest aperture number have you got?

 

Oh, I think I miscommunicated.. I am not presently seeking photography help. I was offering assistance to the person in front of me. Macro lenses go with miniature photography like peanut butter with jelly IMO. I personally like soft focus but I realize Bokeh style photography is not for everyone.