data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/91f1a/91f1a9cddc208d50536f3dd7a4e89c7b2c6f2b1f" alt=""
In the backyard, experimenting with close-up filters 4,2, and 1. The strangest thing about the filters verses the macro lens (which adds 8.9X magnification), is the strange way the background moves around when I zoom in and out. I almost feel like I'm in a 3-D movie.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f1fd2/f1fd2affb4151df4c7b07ea6b0817b792267d4f9" alt="Posted by Hello"
3 comments:
Interesting observation about closeup filters. I tried using them, but didn't have exciting results. That way, your shot is just too good, and I think I'll find out my closeup filters from my closet and resume my experiments!
Are you staking the close up filters?
I also notice that by stacking in the following order the picture is better +4,+2,+1 if you try to do it the other way you get a different result.
At least thats what I got, your results may vary.
To Kousik: I did a little scanning, I guess a number of people experienced different results depending on the brand. It would be interesting to do a few experiments with some half-tone comics patterns. On your butterfly pattern and comic strip pictures I was wondering if maybe you needed to exploit the sharp zone and make sure background elements were in the fuzzy zone.
To rzgzgz: I've been putting the +4 closest to the camera as per some things I'd read. Are you suggesting putting +1 closest to the camera, or did I use notation that suggested that I'd been putting +1 first?
Post a Comment