R7 First Shots with RF 100-500, close-up with butterflies

Mike Engles wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Mike Engles wrote:

Sadly, the 'you nailed it syndrome' seems to be prevalent on all forums, these are no exception. I am one of natures "yes butters'

One could also say I am a "glass half empty" person...

There were stacks of some damsel files recently that I thought were excellent. To me they looked natural.

Unfortunately the shots of the damsel flies show the same stacking problems as the so called sample shots here (they unfortunately don't reflect the camera quality but rather the processing done to them) just a tad different characteristics. Most didn't need stacking in the first place (those damsel flies are big, thus you have low magnification ratio and thus sufficient DOF if you take care not to waste too much - I usually focus half the DOF into the subject so that the full DOF extends across the depth of the subject) - but around the subject there are the typical swirls of the stacking program not knowing where to stop with the stack and failing to blend the out of focus areas decently. There also are unsharp halos around parts of the legs and misidentified areas as well where seemingly the wrong shot from the series was selected to be inserted. Less obvious than with the shots here but still strong enough to be noticeable.

I thought they were pretty good, but agree with what you said about the actual need for stacking for those pictures.I did notice some haloes and artefacts but, I thought that they were better than many I had seen

Perhaps I just like all pictures of Dragonflies and Damselflies

One of the happiest days of my life, when this damselfly used my toe as a vantage point. The little stream was idyllic

here is the question i like to ask: what anatomic part is it where this insect is sitting on?