Small Tortoiseshell (edit added)

Really nice shot Russ. It sits on that background really well.
 
Many thanks for comments, Nick :)
- It's a very large crop already, so I'm not sure how much larger I can make it! I'll have a look at the original and post if it looks ok, otherwise I'll have to get closer to the butterfly next time (or use a longer lens as they are skittish).

Russ
 
Many thanks for comments, Nick :)
- It's a very large crop already, so I'm not sure how much larger I can make it! I'll have a look at the original and post if it looks ok, otherwise I'll have to get closer to the butterfly next time (or use a longer lens as they are skittish).

Russ

I imagine (I'm guessing here) that you could crop a 1DX image 100%. Don't know how close you are to that already.
 
I imagine (I'm guessing here) that you could crop a 1DX image 100%. Don't know how close you are to that already.
Hi Nick,
.... this is a Jpeg of the original Raw image (5472x3648 pixels)
B59I4645.jpg

....and this is the max crop to keep the whole butterfly in the picture, after LR and Topaz DeNoise AI edits
Sharpen AI-89-2.jpg

I'm not sure how to calculate the crop factor here!

Russ
 
Hi Nick,
.... this is a Jpeg of the original Raw image (5472x3648 pixels)
View attachment 286969

....and this is the max crop to keep the whole butterfly in the picture, after LR and Topaz DeNoise AI edits
View attachment 286970

I'm not sure how to calculate the crop factor here!

Russ

Interesting. Thanks for providing the original for comparison purposes.

Some thoughts about crop sizes. Happy to be corrected if my calculations are wrong/midguided (quite possible!)

On my screen the whole image is around 124mm high, and the cropped area within that for the crop in the top post is around 23mm high. Since the whole image is 3648 pixels high, the cropped area is around 23 / 124 * 3648 = around 620 pixels high. The version in the top post is 619 pixels high and is therefore I believe a 100% crop.

The new version has a tighter crop which is around 16mm high in the whole image on my screen, so the pixel height of the crop was around 16 / 124 X 3648 = around 470 pixels. Like the version in the top post, the new crop is posted at 620 pixels high. It has therefore been upsized from 470 to 620 pixels high and is therefore a greater than 100% crop.
 
Interesting. Thanks for providing the original for comparison purposes.

Some thoughts about crop sizes. Happy to be corrected if my calculations are wrong/midguided (quite possible!)

On my screen the whole image is around 124mm high, and the cropped area within that for the crop in the top post is around 23mm high. Since the whole image is 3648 pixels high, the cropped area is around 23 / 124 * 3648 = around 620 pixels high. The version in the top post is 619 pixels high and is therefore I believe a 100% crop.

The new version has a tighter crop which is around 16mm high in the whole image on my screen, so the pixel height of the crop was around 16 / 124 X 3648 = around 470 pixels. Like the version in the top post, the new crop is posted at 620 pixels high. It has therefore been upsized from 470 to 620 pixels high and is therefore a greater than 100% crop.
Many thanks Nick - I get your calculation methodology, seems sensible now you've explained!! This camera/lens combo can certainly deliver great results - I could be tempted to move into Macro myself. :)

Russ
 
Back
Top