# Getting back into my photography - some close ups and focus stacks



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

I've been a keen photographer all of my life, encouraged by my father who was a pro and lecturer in photography. For a multitude of reasons, I've hardly touched a camera for the last couple of years, but I'm wanting to get back into it, so I've been tinkering in the garden a little, just to get to know the cameras again and play with my new Olympus 60mm macro lens. I've downsized from DSLRs to Micro Four Thirds in recent times and love the size of my Olympus E-M10 - not sure I like how it works, it's the most unfathomable menu system and often counter-intuitive to use. I also use a Panasonic FZ330 as this supplements it well - many of my focus stacks are done from that, using 4k video bursts.

It's been too windy to get really close with the lens, so I've done some close ups with multiple frames that I've focus stacked. There are some issues with all of these, I'm still a bit off my game/out of practice, but I've enjoyed the process and it's excited me to get going again. I've just looked at some earlier stacks I did and can see I'm more off my game than I realised. I have been quite disciplined and used a tripod and macro slide to position for these - I normally wing it hand held. These were a bit of an experiment with this camera and lens combo to see what aperture gave the best DOF and accuracy for stacking v. subject isolation / background blurring.

6 frames stacked, of Jacob's ladder seed heads:










7 frames stacked of another seed head - I love the structure of these, I've photographed them many times, they're even nicer when they get dry and brown:










8 frames of a Geranium flower - I love these when they're pristine like this, with some open petals and the new hairy buds unfolding underneath:










This is a single hand held frame, not stacked - the wind just bobbled it from ideal framing, as I fired the shutter:










The centre of a clematis flower - astonishingly, the snails didn't get it. I want to try a focus stack on one of these, but it needs the wind to drop, they bobble about too much in the slightest breeze, as they're at the end of a long thin stalk:


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

I'm sorry I missed this thread until now @BooJewels. What stunning pictures you have taken. Many years ago, I was well into photography with all the 35mm SLR kit (before the advent of DSLR) including ludicrously long and unwieldy telephoto lenses and macro lenses for nature shots. Eventually, I got tired of lugging around flight cases of equipment and opted for a Samsung compact which I used for many years... in fact a lot of my watch shots from when I first joined here were taken with it. As phone cameras have come on in leaps and bounds, I now just use my phone (Samsung Note 20 Ultra) which has quite an exceptional camera built in, with wide angle, HD capture and 50x telephoto (OK, it's digital and quite [email protected] at max res.) as it's so easy to get out quickly for the odd opportunist shot. I'm intrigued to know what 'frame or focus stacking' is, as it's a term I've not come across before... would you be able to explain it a little for an old codger? I have just added a lot more flower pics in the 'Let's See Your Beautiful Gardens' thread in the Non Watch Interests and Hobbies section.

Edit: So I Googled it as you do, and it seems it's quite complicated and needs some serious computer software to achieve the desired effect. Not sure if you can do it using a phone camera, even if it is one of the best currently available.


----------



## Always"watching" (Sep 21, 2013)

Thanks to the above post from@Roger the Dodger , I have also now discovered your OP with those lovely flower shots. Like Roger, I am most interested to hear exactly what "stacking" is, and how does it improve an image.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Sorry, I missed the posts earlier - but I'll be happy to explain focus stacking in more detail later. I'm just on my tablet at the moment, so it'll be easier to post from the computer - as it might make more sense if I illustrate it.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

If I explain the main photographic principle, it might make more sense of what I've done - apologies if it's already well understood - which it probably is for @Roger the Dodger if you've used SLR equipment previously.

When you take a photograph - with any equipment - there's an amount of the image/ your scene as captured, from front to back that is of acceptable sharpness/ is in focus when viewing it. This is called the Depth of Field (DOF). This DOF isn't the same for every photograph, it's the result of photographic geometry and is determined by several factors - from the size of the sensor or film plane, focal length of the lens, distance from the subject, aperture of the lens, where within the scene you focus etc.

In respect of the sensor/film plane size - the smaller this is, the better (greater) DOF you have in the resulting image - which is why phone cameras these days give such pleasing results - they have tiny wee sensors, so give a great DOF - and a bonus to that is that it isn't quite so critical where you focus, so you can fire off images without much through and get very acceptable results. Large format camera from 35mm SLRs upwards have much larger sensors, so give rise to a much shallower DOF for the same scene. Most digital cameras fall between these extremes - compact cameras, through Micro four thirds like I have and DSLRs, gradually getting larger.

The longer the focal length of the lens, the shallower the DOF, likewise the closer you are. So using a medium sized sensor, like my M4:3, with a 60mm macro lens from close quarters, gives rise to a very shallow DOF for close ups - something like 3mm or less for some of the scenes above, as you can see with the clematis flower centre above. Obviously to get a close up, you get close to the subject, so another factor which reduces DOF. If I were to take the same scene with a longer lens from further away (probably with a wider field of view), I'd get more in focus, compared to getting close to the subject with a shorter focal length (i.e. less zoom) - so these are both methods that have merit, depending on what you want to achieve.

Also worth noting the definition of 'macro' - this is for when the subject is represented at 1:1 magnification on the sensor - anything larger is just a close up. The size of magnification is also determined by how close you can get to the subject - and this is determined by how close the lens will allow you to focus - so true macro lenses (like the Olympus 60mm macro I used above) allow you to focus from a couple of inches away. You can also get closer by using close up filters added to the front of other lenses, reducing their minimum focus distance and therefore how large the subject appears on the sensor.

This is a true macro shot of a little weevil or something in the top of a daisy - he's about 2-3mm in length. I'd spotted him when watering the plant - he'd dig his tongue or whatever down into the little floret for nectar, then go up vertical, with his back legs waving about, trying not to topple bum over apex. You can see individual pollen grains and the scales on his body - he just looked dark brown to the naked eye.










So, when taking shots like above, you only get a small amount of the flower/seed head or whatever in acceptable focus in a single shot. So what can be done is to take several photos, from a static position, with the focus in a slightly different place in each subsequent image. So you might take 5 or more frames of a scene (some extreme close up macros, done by specialists in the studio can take many hundreds), you start at the front and work backwards, focusing in a slightly different place towards the back of the scene you want sharp - usually leaving the background out of focus, for subject isolation.

You then use software to blend these together into one finished scene, with it masking together the sharpest bit of each frame, so that you get a much greater DOF than could be achieved in a single frame. Obviously, you could just take the photograph differently, with a smaller sensor or shorter lens, but where's the fun in that. More would have got a better, sharper image, but it was a very early test of a new method and new lens for me.

This is the front, single frame from the top seed head above, showing how little of it is in focus - I used 6 frames to get the seed heads all in focus - maybe 30mm, from front to back.










Obviously there are pitfalls to the focus stacking method - ideally you need nothing to move (including you), so the frames stack without errors - it's easy to get bits ghosted and insects do have a habit of running around the subject, so they get picked up more than once - so some manual masking is sometimes needed too. Modern cameras make such projects easier than ever, with touch screen shutter firing, computer tethering, apps to control the camera and 4k video bursts - which is another method I use.

I think this is my single favourite to date - taken as a 4k post focus video burst on a Panasonic bridge camera and stacked from 39 frames.










I like doing fungi, as they don't blow about in the wind - 62 frames stacked - these are tiny:










To see the images at the size I produced them, you might need to right click on them and 'open in a new tab' as the forum is only showing them at a reduced size, which softens them.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

Wow! Thank you for such a brilliant and detailed post, @BooJewels the time you have taken and the explanation are much appreciated. I see that the camera needs to be on a tripod, or fixed in one position so that each pic is exactly the same as the last except for the varying F stop, or focus affecting the DOF? I'm also thinking this is something you can't do with a phone camera, unless it's also mounted in a holder and you can access the advanced features such as being able to alter the F stop, or manually alter/adjust the focus as on my Note 20 Ultra. The manual focus (found in the advanced settings) on the Note 20 Ultra is quite clever... when pinsharp, there is a green halo around the part of the subject that's actually in focus. This can be altered by dragging a finger up or down the scale at the side of the image so that differing parts are focused on. I guess you then need a software package to combine all the images. Your shot of the wild Iris seed pod above stacked from 39 frames is outstanding, even more so when opened in a new tab at full size. Is there a package you would recommend that might work for a phone? Any help gratefully received, and I thank you once again for such a detailed and informative post. :thumbsup:

Edit: One quite clever feature of the Note 20 camera is that when taking a close up of, say, a flower, a message comes up on the screen saying 'Switch to 2x and move phone back a bit', presumably to alter the DOF. Pics can be altered, cropped, enlarged and sharpened/enhanced digitally within the built in editing suite in the phone's gallery.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

One useful feature of some Samsung items is that they can be synched together and then one operated remotely from the other. This is a technique that I have used in the past to capture bird shots, where I set the phone up on a tripod focused on the bird feeder, then retired indoors and watched what it was looking at via the screen on my tablet so as not to disturb the birds. When one landed on the feeder, it was just a matter of triggering the shutter from the tablet. No long release cables needed, all done via bluetooth. Most were done using a burst shot, then selecting the best one/s from the resulting series of pics.

This was the phone (A Samsung S10+ at the time) on the tripod looking at the feeder.









A couple of the resulting shots.
Blue Tit.









Nuthatch. These were the results of a burst shot, with the best ones selected.


















Long Tailed Tits.


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

@BooJewels good work and a great explanation, thank you!


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Roger the Dodger said:


> Wow! Thank you for such a brilliant and detailed post, @BooJewels the time you have taken and the explanation are much appreciated. Does the camera need to be on a tripod, or fixed in one position so that each pic is exactly the same as the last except for the varying F stop, or focus affecting the DOF? I'm also thinking this is something you can't do with a phone camera, unless it's mounted in a holder and you can access the advanced features such as being able to alter the F stop, or manually alter/adjust the focus as on my Note 20 Ultra. The manual focus (found in the advanced settings) on the Note 20 Ultra is quite clever... when pinsharp, there is a green halo around the part of the subject that's actually in focus. This can be altered by dragging a finger up or down the scale at the side of the image so that differing parts are focused on. I guess you then need a software package to combine all the images. Your shot of the wild Iris seed pod above stacked from 39 frames is outstanding. Is there a package you would recommend that might work for a phone? Any help gratefully received, and I thank you once again for such a detailed and informative post. :thumbsup:


 Morning. I must apologise, my post was a bit scatter brained, my brain seems to be mush these days and it all leapt about a bit. I should have planned and edited it a bit better - instead of just writing a stream of consciousness.

Yes, you ideally need to use a tripod. I tend to wing it a bit and often just go handheld, but that's making a rod for your own back in post-production and the stack process is less likely to be successful, or throw out more errors. I tend to go handheld with the 4k post focus mode, as that does it all automatically and very quickly. If you're using the camera to manually re-focus on a different place, you really need the discipline of being on a tripod. Everything should be the same from frame to frame - including the exposure, so you'd work in a manual mode so that they only thing that changed between frames is where it has been focussed. I do a lot of panoramas too and that's the same - everything consistent between frames. With those I even set focus manually for the entire scene and just move and make overlapping frames with everything the same.

You don't vary the aperture/ƒ stop between frames - only where you focus. You might well try different apertures for different individual frames, but not within a sequence to stack. A photography forum buddy and I (who was much better at this than me) did a stack-off to test a couple of theories and we both came to the conclusion that only a stop or so stopped down from maximum aperture gave the best results. We both found that you actually got more errors where you started with a better DOF in each image. The software seems to do better where it only has a small amount in focus in each frame, it seems to be able to pick it out more easily. We found that more frames, each with a shallower DOF gave better results than fewer frames, each with more in focus.

I think the ones above were at ƒ/6.3 - on a lens with a maximum aperture of ƒ/2.8 - so bent my own rule a little on that - as I was experimenting with these as my first stacks with this lens and it was windy, so I made the decision to go for fewer frames in that instance, plus I needed the shutter speed. But I wouldn't stop down any further than that for a stack. You do also need to consider shutter speed too - you don't want to capture any movement in small subjects that oscillate with even the tiniest breath of wind, so a wider aperture gives rise to faster shutter speeds.

I have no idea if this would work using a phone camera, my own isn't good enough to be worth even trying - although I have used the phone to fire the camera as you illustrated above with your gorgeous bird shots. I suspect, as just mentioned, that the greater DOF that the tiny sensors achieve might make stacking less reliable. I don't even know if the stacking software would accept phone camera images - it tends to be a bit picky - it doesn't like it if you have one image in the sequence out of order. The software I use is called Helicon Focus - it's one of the programs that you now licence for a year, so I think it's currently about £35 for the year.

I wonder if there is a phone app that would do it all within your phone - I don't know as I've never tried - a quick look in Play store shows that there might be some available, but I didn't look in any detail. Even my phone will do HDR and blending exposures in low light to reduce noise, so the technology is potentially there.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

@BooJewels. Once again, thank you for such a detailed reply and taking the time to do it. I will do a search myself and see if there's some dedicated stacking software available for mobiles. :thumbsup:


----------



## Always"watching" (Sep 21, 2013)

Just a quickie; having read your excellent and detailed exposition, dear @BooJewels, I just wondered about a couple of points. Firstly, can the camera automatically do some of the stacking work when taking a photograph. In other words, is there a mode whereby the camera itself adjusts the focus step-by-step, automatically taking a picture of the subject at each focus setting? And secondly, what happens if the subject of the photograph moves; for example, in that nice pic of the weevil on the daisy head, did the weevil need to stay stationary while the stacking process was underway?

Apologies if I sound ignorant in these queries but my main photography work was done pre-digital. :biggrin:

May I also just thank @Roger the Dodger for those bird pics. A gorgeous nuthatch, and a gaggle of long-tailed tits, one of my favourite birds. :thumbsup:


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Good evening @Always"watching". I also reiterate what you said about Roger's bird photos, I'm especially fond of both nuthatches and long tailed tits and lucky to get both in the garden - I was outside yesterday doing something in the garden and they all arrived to visit the feeders, flying around my head, chattering away - they're such cheery little souls - they don't seem at all concerned with me being out there and flitter about around me. My husband suffered with sepsis in 2005 and was on life support for a while, after which, whilst he made a decent recovery, he lost some vocabulary and just could not remember what some things were called and even if you told him again, that word just would not stay put. One such was 'nuthatch'. One day he declared that the 'wood nymph' was on the feeder and after we laughed at the silliness of it, it stuck and he never could remember what they were called going forwards. So they'll always be wood nymphs to me!

There are 2 stages to the focus stacking process - 1] taking the photos - in a sequence with focus in a different place in each one and 2] stacking them together into a single image. Some cameras don't offer any assistance, some allow automated processes for taking a series of differently focussed images and some will do it all in-camera as a single process and give you a single already-stacked image. It largely depends on how much you want to spend!

For example, my Olympus E-M10MkII doesn't give much automated help, other than I can focus and take the shot using the rear touch sensitive screen, which makes it nice and easy to just touch the image on the screen where you want it to focus and it focusses there and fires the shutter. Higher Olympus 4:3 cameras offer an all-in-one option, but they're over a thousand pounds more in price.

I also have a Panasonic bridge camera and that does what they call post focus 4k video - and this is a series of frames taken rapidly by the camera, using every focussing point it has that finds something it can focus on underneath it. So it's like a short burst video of the same scene, but each frame has focus in a different place. The orange seed pod and little fungi were done with that. With those, I have to extract the individual frames, go through them and select which ones are pertinent (I usually use about a third or half of them), then use the software to stack them. Plus I'm limited to a relatively low resolution JPEG only - I can't shoot RAW to get the best image quality. So each has advantages and disadvantages. I'm not familiar enough with current cameras to know what models offer in this regard now - I haven't bought a new camera for about 3 years.

If the subject moves, you might not get a good stack. The software is pretty good and will make some adjustments, but sometimes you just have to either eliminate bad frames or call it quits on that one - movement can give rise to ghosting of edges or repeated details. I habitually do several runs of the frame taking process and flip through each set to see which looks like it will work best and the best frames for it.

The weevil was a single frame, not a stack - I just posted that to show the magnification of a macro, rather than just a close up. And yes, it would need to be still really. Wind is the biggest enemy - flowers and the like can move with even the lightest of breezes.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

Thanks to both @BooJewels and @Always"watching" for your kind comments on my bird photos. While I did post a thread about them a couple of years ago, maybe you would both like see some more of the results that my phone camera managed to capture. BTW, I in no way mean to detract from Boo's fabulous pictures above, which are far more accomplished than I can achieve at the moment. These were taken looking at the phone camera's view on my tablet while sitting indoors.

Another Blue Tit.










Who you lookin' at?










Great Tit










Marsh Tit



















The ubiquitous Robin.




























Coal Tit...distinguished by the white flash on its head.









And again.










Three for the price of one, Blue Tit, Great Tit and Marsh Tit... not such a good shot, the camera focused more on the two birds at the rear.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Those are adorable - I feel like I want to reach out and give them a little tickle. They're all interested in your phone - did it make a noise when it fired, or is it perhaps shiny on the back side that's facing them - as it clearly interests them. The focus is good on the bottom photo on the marsh tit - he just moved and the shutter speed was slower than him - see, his feet are sharp. Little birds move very fast, so need decent shutter speeds to freeze them.

I get a good selection of birds, but have never had a marsh tit at home - just coal tits. I get quite a lot of bullfinches, which aren't that common for most people. I have a new young greater spotted woodpecker that's just started visiting.

You're lucky to have nice neat open feeders like that to attract them - I am plagued with grey squirrels and wood pigeons - and both just seem hell bent on destruction. If the feeders get empty, the squirrels just attack them, jumping up and down on them, trying to force them off their hangers, gnawing at the closures etc. and keep watching me in a "fill it or I destroy it" manner. The woodies are just clumsy and flappy and spill everything. I got sick of them knocking my bird table over - when two landed on the top of it and started fighting, so in a fit of pique I went out with my cordless screwdriver and 4" self-tapping woodscrews and made a ridge of random screws sticking out of the roof ridge. Looks very attractive - like a birdie prison block. I'm sure my neighbours must look out and say "what the heck's she doing now?" Even next door's cat came and watched me - he likes to make sure I do things right. But the table hasn't been toppled since.

I've put a filled coconut half on a corner by the lounge window and so far only the tits and a young robin have found it, so it feels like our little secret. I almost got the young robin to come to my hand the other day - he kept flying towards me and chickening out and darting off at the last minute, but I'll keep working on him. My aunt has a blackbird that comes into her kitchen and sits on the end of the worktop waiting to be given a few sultanas. They must pass it on, as she's had one doing it for at least the last 40 years.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

BooJewels said:


> Those are adorable - I feel like I want to reach out and give them a little tickle. They're all interested in your phone - did it make a noise when it fired, or is it perhaps shiny on the back side that's facing them - as it clearly interests them. The focus is good on the bottom photo on the marsh tit - he just moved and the shutter speed was slower than him - see, his feet are sharp. Little birds move very fast, so need decent shutter speeds to freeze them.


 It may have been the soft 'click' that most phones make when the shutter is released, although this is a digitally produced sound made by the phone to give the impression of a real camera and can usually be turned off in the camera settings if desired... as I did in later sessions. Or it may be that they caught a reflection of themselves in the back of the phone which took them unawares. Some of birds get quite territorial if they spot another, especially in the breeding season. While at work, we once had a Chaffinch that spotted itself in the wing mirror of one of our vans, and for the next two weeks relentlessly and futilely attacked its own reflection in an attempt to drive the 'intruder' off. He made a right mess of the mirror! If you like nature pictures please feel free to look at my 'Flora and Fauna' album in the gallery here (it's open to anyone who wants to see it) as it will be preferable to me posting lots more pics here. Nearly 1600 pics of flowers, insects, reptiles, animals and other stuff to while away an hour or so. Quite a few of them are from when I worked as estate manager and horticulturist on a local estate for 21 years.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Good morning @Roger the Dodger. I've had a quick look at your gallery, just clicking on a few pages at random, so I need to look at it more carefully when I've more time.

I saw the ones with a dragonfly on your hands - how fabulous, I've never been able to get that to happen. I have one of the large bright blue ones living somewhere nearby and twice I've gone out of the front door and have disturbed it clinging onto my stone walls, presumably to soak up some warmth. When I remember, I creep out more quietly in case it's there, but of course, on those occasions, it's not been. There's no obvious body of water nearby, so not sure where is resides.

I did wonder if it was a reflection that caught your birds attention - robins especially will be very territorial with another, they're quite vicious.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

BooJewels said:


> Good morning @Roger the Dodger. I've had a quick look at your gallery, just clicking on a few pages at random, so I need to look at it more carefully when I've more time.
> 
> I saw the ones with a dragonfly on your hands - how fabulous, I've never been able to get that to happen. I have one of the large bright blue ones living somewhere nearby and twice I've gone out of the front door and have disturbed it clinging onto my stone walls, presumably to soak up some warmth. When I remember, I creep out more quietly in case it's there, but of course, on those occasions, it's not been. There's no obvious body of water nearby, so not sure where is resides.
> 
> I did wonder if it was a reflection that caught your birds attention - robins especially will be very territorial with another, they're quite vicious.


 There's an old photographers trick to get insect subjects to pose nicely without moving around too much and that is to first capture your subject in a special insect net, then place it in a container in the fridge for 10 minutes or so. They will go into a torpor or hibernation like state and you can then pose them and take your pics. This works very well for dragonflies. They always recover very quickly, and are released unharmed after their shoot. I have never had an insect die on me using this technique.

https://www.watdon.co.uk/acatalog/butterfly-insect-nets.html


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Roger the Dodger said:


> There's an old photographers trick to get insect subjects to pose nicely without moving around too much and that is to first capture your subject in a special insect net, then place it in a container in the fridge for 10 minutes or so. They will go into a torpor or hibernation like state and you can then pose them and take your pics. This works very well for dragonflies. They always recover very quickly, and are released unharmed after their shoot. I have never had an insect die on me using this technique.
> 
> https://www.watdon.co.uk/acatalog/butterfly-insect-nets.html


 Thanks for the tip - I'd forgotten about it. One of the photographers I know that does very extensive and very close insect macros does that. But it would just be another cause for my neighbours to laugh at me - chasing round the garden with a big net! Working on the principle that the dafter something you do looks, the more likely it is that someone will be watching. Hence I perpetually feel like I have an audience. oops:


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

Do you also take videos @BooJewels? Sorry if this is a bit 'off topic', but this was one of those rare occasions when you're doing something else, and a rare subject suddenly appears. This was a Hummingbird Hawkmoth that appeared out of nowhere while I was deadheading some flowers. It was one of those times when you can just whip the phone out and start shooting instantly. Although taken in HQD, you will notice that the video camera has made the wings appear to be moving in slow motion, when in reality, they were just a blur and account for the humming noise associated with these day flying moths. Also, excuse my breathing on the soundtrack... I was rather excited to see it! You can hear the humming of the wings in the last few seconds of the clip.

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/6G1U2TQhpxU?feature=oembed


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

How fabulous @Roger the Dodger - I would have been excited too. I've only seen one in my own garden (a few years ago now) as it was going dark and managed a few photos of very poor quality. I set up and went out every evening at the same time, as they're supposed to be creatures of habit, but never saw it again. The place we'll be staying in Switzerland next year has balconies full of flowers and my sister has had them on her balcony every evening when there, so I hope I get to see one too.

I forget to take video, as all my cameras and phone will do it, but it often doesn't enter my head until it's too late - I should do so more often as often video in poor lighting conditions is more forgiving than poor stills.

I had a poplar hawk moth in my garden wheelie bin a month or so ago - not as brightly coloured as the hummingbird variety, but he was a whopper. I opened the lid to lob some rubbish in there he was perched inside the lid. I left the lid propped up on a piece of timber and he was gone the next morning, so I hope all was well. Not sure how he got in there or how long he'd been in there.

#









I also have bats and hedgehogs (I've seen 2 at once) in the garden - the bats are totally beyond my speed of reaction and equipment, but managed a couple of the hedgehogs in the light from the kitchen window. This was the only bat shot where it was actually discernible as a bat! I only even managed that because my sister bought me a bat detector and as it is quite directional, I used the sound to help me anticipate when he was coming in to frame and fire off a burst. Even that only caught them as they were leaving frame. Although, I went out last night for some other reason and one was buzzing round my head at eye level, I could actually look straight at it - well, for a nano second as it vanished. They don't seem in the slightest bothered by me - in fact, because I'm one of those people that midges love, if I stand still, I must attract bugs and the bats just circle around above my head, chomping them up, which suits me just fine. I'm pretty sure they buzz me for a giggle.

It was actually the bat detector that found me the hedgehogs - it picked up their snuffling as I was listening for bats - it was a very odd experience as I could basically hear heavy breathing in my headphones - I was about to run inside, totally spooked, when one came out from under the fern. It was nowhere near as light to the eye as the photo looks - it was taken at 20,000 ISO.


----------



## Always"watching" (Sep 21, 2013)

What an absolutely stonking thread and thanks so much for all the explanations and photographs, dear @BooJewels and @Roger the Dodger.

We live in an urban terrace in a fairly industrialized Sussex harbour town and have a tiny back garden so the range of wildlife is rather limited. We have had a hummingbird hawk moth, which was exciting, and of course we do have local foxes patrolling the neighbourhood. In terms of bird life, our garden doesn't see a lot of variety, but evidently a local female sparrowhawk has been finding prey in and around our street as we have now seen her twice recently. I regularly walk through the nearby local nature reserves and what I would describe as semi-countryside areas, and have seen some interesting birds, including peregrine falcons and also a pair of regular ravens who are very much in love with one another.

I have not taken a camera with me on bird watching walks, partly because I find that binoculars are all I really want to carry, and I don't possess a smart phone. However, looking at the pics on this thread makes me wonder if I should have a go at a bit of wildlife photography in the field, so to speak. I must admit that I am a bit put off when I see local birdwatchers humping bulky equipment - notably cameras with ultra-long lenses - as I always prefer to travel light. Anyway, please continue to enliven our lives with your beautiful photographs and experiences, and thanks again. :thumbsup:


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

Hi, @BooJewels Just as an aside, I spent a long time today sorting out the 'Bug' thread in this section (getting rid of dead links, etc) which has been going since 2011... might be worth a look if you're interested as there's more scope for giving info and details about the creatures shown. Although called the bug thread, there are some amphibians and reptiles included, too. Will be nice to see some of your pics there!


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Always said:


> We live in an urban terrace in a fairly industrialized Sussex harbour town and have a tiny back garden so the range of wildlife is rather limited. We have had a hummingbird hawk moth, which was exciting, and of course we do have local foxes patrolling the neighbourhood. In terms of bird life, our garden doesn't see a lot of variety, but evidently a local female sparrowhawk has been finding prey in and around our street as we have now seen her twice recently. I regularly walk through the nearby local nature reserves and what I would describe as semi-countryside areas, and have seen some interesting birds, including peregrine falcons and also a pair of regular ravens who are very much in love with one another.
> 
> I have not taken a camera with me on bird watching walks, partly because I find that binoculars are all I really want to carry, and I don't possess a smart phone. However, looking at the pics on this thread makes me wonder if I should have a go at a bit of wildlife photography in the field, so to speak. I must admit that I am a bit put off when I see local birdwatchers humping bulky equipment - notably cameras with ultra-long lenses - as I always prefer to travel light. Anyway, please continue to enliven our lives with your beautiful photographs and experiences, and thanks again. :thumbsup:


 I have a paper mill that makes loo roll on the other side of me, so it's nice that there are enough trees around on the other side that we still get decent wildlife in my postage stamp sized garden. Well, there's a decent amount of it, but it's not a useful shape or layout really, as it's U shaped and wraps around a long thin house. One upright of the U is walled and is my 'garden' where I sit out and have all my flora and the other 2 sides are open to the street and neighbours, so more of a nuisance to maintain rather than an asset. The hedgehogs were on one of the open sides where I just keep my bird feeders, but don't actively use.

I too got fed up with lumping around camera gear, so sold all my DSLR kit and went much smaller and lighter with my Micro four thirds gear (pretty much at entry level), which is decent quality and well featured, but small and compact for carrying.

Once you've viewed birds and the like through binoculars, anything you can capture with a camera is likely to be a disappointment, unless you spend gob-loads of cash and carry a massive weight of gear.

I'm away soon, so I'll maybe post some photos once back - if the weather doesn't prove to be as bad as the current forecast!



Roger the Dodger said:


> Hi, @BooJewels Just as an aside, I spent a long time today sorting out the 'Bug' thread in this section (getting rid of dead links, etc) which has been going since 2011... might be worth a look if you're interested as there's more scope for giving info and details about the creatures shown. Although called the bug thread, there are some amphibians and reptiles included, too. Will be nice to see some of your pics there!


 Thanks Roger, I had a quick look and there's some fabulous photos in the thread. I'm off away soon and struggling to get everything done in time, so I'll give it more time once I'm back and maybe post some bug photos of my own.

I've downloaded the instruction manuals for my cameras and will need to spend some time getting familiar with them again - it's frightening how quickly you forget this stuff when you don't use them for a while. Depressing really.


----------



## Always"watching" (Sep 21, 2013)

Many thanks @BooJewels. I might save up and go "compact"; my collection of pocket-szed digital cameras is not really up to the job when it comes to capturing wildlife in the wild, and your solution of a high quality Micro four thirds compact camera could be the way to go, so thanks for that advice. Have a good trip away - look forward to seeing more of your photos.


----------



## Q.Lotte (Feb 10, 2014)

Roger the Dodger said:


> One useful feature of some Samsung items is that they can be synched together and then one operated remotely from the other. This is a technique that I have used in the past to capture bird shots, where I set the phone up on a tripod focused on the bird feeder, then retired indoors and watched what it was looking at via the screen on my tablet so as not to disturb the birds. When one landed on the feeder, it was just a matter of triggering the shutter from the tablet. No long release cables needed, all done via bluetooth. Most were done using a burst shot, then selecting the best one/s from the resulting series of pics.
> 
> This was the phone (A Samsung S10+ at the time) on the tripod looking at the feeder.
> 
> ...


 Hi Roger, worth noting that on the Note series (I've had 1, 3, 4 and now 9), the detachable stylus is also a remote control and its button can be used to remotely trigger the camera shutter - very handy if you have it set up on a tripod or want to take a close up shot and not shake the camera by touching the 'phone.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Evening. I'm back off my holibobs, with a few photos in the cameras. I tend to take RAW and JPEG files of each view and work on whichever has the best potential. As a very vague generalisation, I tend to use the RAW file for landscapes and scenics and the JPEG is often best for macros and flowers. All of these were developed from RAW.

Because I was holidaying with my sister (and her dog) for the first time without other family, it was difficult to predict what our routine would be etc. We ended up walking quite a bit, periodically sitting and looking at the view and nattering, so I didn't get the same opportunities to work on photos much more than just firing a few frames off as I went along - no time for setting things up especially well.

Keeping things on a wildlife theme, one of the places we visited was a National Trust property called Calke Abbey in Derbyshire which has a deer park, so we both really enjoyed watching the deer - supposedly a herd of around 75 fallow Deer and 25 red deer - but we're pretty sure we saw more than that. We were also pretty sure that they were working a rota between them to come close to the fence for photos. One or two would strut past a time or two, then go off and feed or sleep, to be replaced by another that would do the back and forth in front of us. As the day drew on, the weather improved (it had rained heavily earlier), most people left and we were left with it pretty quiet and quality time with them. I think they were curious about the dog and she just sat there looking at them, looking up at us occasionally as if to ask what was going on with their heads.

This big boy was a real poser - he kept strutting past and stopping and looking directly at me; "you got the photo yet lady, these things are heavy". This was taken at 35mm focal length (70mm @ 35mm equivalent), so it shows how close he was - maybe 6 or 8 feet away - this was the full frame. You might need to open the photos in a new tab and then click to see them at full size. The rut is just starting, so a couple of the big boys did a bit of a sparring in front of us, but we'd packed up and were just getting in the car, so no photos.



















The fallow deer especially were hanging around under the trees, when we realised why - every time a conker or acorn fell, they'd all dash to try and get it - clearly a nutritious delicacy to them.



















The shier ones stayed deeper in the woodland and when it rained heavily, we sheltered under a big oak tree and just watched them chasing acorns. By golly, we got our money's worth that day.



















I'll post some landscapes tomorrow.


----------



## spinynorman (Apr 2, 2014)

Wonderful photos @BooJewels and a great commentary as well.


----------



## Stan (Aug 7, 2003)

If you love animals, you're fine with me. :wink: Great pictures and I love that the buck let you get so close. Although, animals can tell when humans respect them.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Stan said:


> If you love animals, you're fine with me. :wink: Great pictures and I love that the buck let you get so close. Although, animals can tell when humans respect them.


 Thank you kindly @Stan and @spinynorman My father was one of those people who animals would just come to - he gave off something that could coax over the most shy of animals. The stag would have come over for a tickle from him. I have something of it, in that I can usually get close and I always talk to them - I explain what I'm doing and ask if it would be okay. I asked this chap if I could take this photo and he turned and looked me straight in the eye. I told him how handsome he was and thanked him for allowing me to do so. Which is why I frequently get laughed at and my neighbours think I'm bonkers.

When my son was about 4 we went to Tarn Hows in the Lake District and the National Trust vehicle was there with the chap signing people up and offering assistance and he was eating a piece of fruit cake and he put a small crumb on his hand and held it up and a robin came down and took it. My son was enthralled and just stood there with his mouth open, mesmerised. So the chap asked him if he wanted to feed his friend too. So he nodded and was told to hold his hand out and be very still and if the robin liked him, he'd come and take the crumb. My son was totally unmoving, I don't think he even breathed. The robin duly came and landed on his hand, gave a little song, took the crumb and was gone.

The bloke said to him that if he was patient and still with wildlife, it would always be rewarded, so it was worth doing. He told us that my son would never forget that and it would be a lesson that would live with him - which it certainly has. He said that a hundred or more children went past him every day and there would be very very few he would have done that with - that would be receptive to it and be prepared to be still long enough. He turned to my husband and said "he gets it from her" and pointed at me. He said "I bet she's all hell and fury on the outside, but she's totally still on the inside, I can feel it and that's what animals feel too".

I never saw him again, as he retired, but I think of him every time I get near wildlife and his words have stayed with me too.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

I don't know if this will work, but I'll give it a try - video is something I've not tinkered with for years.

I noticed last night that the two little bats that spend most time near me, were whizzing around right outside the lounge window, so I went out with the bat detector and they were so close, I tried getting some video on the phone, but it was constantly trying to focus on the sky, so I grabbed a camera. This recorded better, but also kept trying to focus on the sky behind, so I've just edited out a few seconds where what I was trying to show works a bit better. I had the bat detector in my shirt pocket, so you get the sound of that with the video of them flying, albeit it pretty much out of focus. I've since figured out how to focus the first frame with the camera and it retain the same focus, so, if it stops raining, I'll try again tonight.

It won't let me embed the video, so I'll post a link and see if that works - no it doesn't, although the URL on its own will play the video, so you might need to copy and paste it into another tab:

https://photos.imageevent.com/boophotos/derbyshire2022/batswithaudio_small.mp4

Sorry, it won't let me delete this pointless post.


----------



## spinynorman (Apr 2, 2014)

BooJewels said:


> Sorry, it won't let me delete this pointless post.


 On a Windows PC the file plays if you right click on the link and 'Open Link In New Tab'. On my iPad it runs if you tap the link. The sound and video are fascinating, so not sure why you would want to delete it, but I, or one of the other mods, can do it for you if you ask.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

Video works on my tablet just fine, both audio and visual.


----------



## angus5041 (Sep 1, 2020)

Great pictures


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

spinynorman said:


> On a Windows PC the file plays if you right click on the link and 'Open Link In New Tab'. On my iPad it runs if you tap the link. The sound and video are fascinating, so not sure why you would want to delete it, but I, or one of the other mods, can do it for you if you ask.


 Thanks @spinynorman - I could make it play myself by right clicking, as you describe, but it didn't seem much use if people have to jump through hoops to make it play.

I did a better video last night in respect of the visuals - as I found I could pre-focus the camera, then shoot the video in manual focus - and it was lighter when they appeared, but the sound isn't as good. I took it in the video mode of the camera (which opens up lots of shooting options - as opposed to just pressing the record button whilst in a camera stills mode) and the camera was obviously doing something itself, that was being picked up by the bat detector, interfering with the sound. But the bat does do a fabulous loop de loop in the middle when he circles to get a month or something - I love how their ultrasonic calls increase in pitch and frequency. See: https://photos.imageevent.com/boophotos/derbyshire2022/batloopedeloop.mp4

I need to do more work to get to understand the video mode of the camera, it's very sophisticated and I've just not used it before. I think I know what was happening last night, so I might try again tonight. Ironically, my fingers struggle on the touch screen, but my nose seems to work it just fine!

Just seen your reply @Roger the Dodger - thanks for trying - I can't actually get it to work on my tablet.


----------



## spinynorman (Apr 2, 2014)

BooJewels said:


> I could make it play myself by right clicking, as you describe, but it didn't seem much use if people have to jump through hoops to make it play.


 It will play on my PC if I just click on the link, and use the browser's back button when it's finished. New one works fine too. Also both work in Safari on my iPad. I think Roger's on Android, so that's all bases covered.

At the previous house we lived in bats used to nest in a tiled overhang, so we saw them a lot. There was one time my wife found one of the young ones dead on the path. I've always thought of bats as leathery things out of Hammer horror, but this was covered in soft fur, like velvet.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

Yes, that's correct, my Samsung tablet is android, and the new video works fine just by tapping the link... nice pics! Perhaps when you're more familiar with the settings, mount it on a tripod and try a slo-mo video. :thumbsup:


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Mine seem to live under my roof - and crawl into their roost through a tiny gap that has been formed where the uneven stone has given rise to a recess alongside a piece of timber. I've watched them come and go through it with the binoculars and they flatten themselves against the stone and squeeze through it. I think they disappeared for a while during the hot spell, my very steep pitch roof was probably too hot up there. But they're clearly back now, as they leave droppings on my windowsill - so I know when they're in residence.

I too have found the odd dead one and as you say, they're like the very softest velvet. It's only their wings that are 'skin'. I have also picked up what I think are brown long eared bats with the detector - they only fly after full darkness and feed over water, so I think a colony of them come from trees up the hill a bit from me and fly over the house en route to the river nearby. They are a lot larger and fly slower and silently and they spook me a little as they're just a shadow passing over you - I counted over 30 one night - they're a much slower and deeper sound from the detector - which is how you identify the species - from the frequency.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Roger the Dodger said:


> Yes, that's correct, my Samsung tablet is android, and the new video works fine just by tapping the link... nice pics! Perhaps when you're more familiar with the settings, mount it on a tripod and try a slo-mo video. :thumbsup:


 Yes, that was the plan, to get some very high speed stuff - it will allow you to see them better and maybe actually catch a still frame. Might have to hand hold though as they're above my head, but the IS seems to work very well.

I've only even recorded any video on this camera in the last couple of weeks - so it's all new to me - and the Olympus interface is nowhere near as easy to learn as other marques - I consult the manual more than I have with any other camera - and then it doesn't even make sense sometimes. Thankfully, because it's a bit strange, there are several users who post how-to videos on-line - and that's where I usually find answers. Plus I've had to figure out how to trim just the section I want and to save it at a smaller format.

Here's a silly one. We were watching the deer, sheltering from the rain and we both thought we heard a sneeze, then another and it wasn't a person nearby, it was the deer. So as I had my compact camera in my hand, I zoomed in (it's something ludicrous like 960mm equivalent focal length) on one of the deer, just to see if it was one sneezing which it is. The movement is the pulse in my fingers - telegraphed by the daft focal length. Unfortunately, she's perhaps sneezing due to nasal-bot flies - which sound totally horrible things.

This is a still frame from it, video linked below - not very good quality, but it was nice that she was looking right at me and has such a pretty face:










https://photos.imageevent.com/boophotos/derbyshire2022/Deersneezing_sm.mp4


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

Ha ha... she definitely had a tickly nose. They always look lovely in the proper surroundings. However, when they start coming into my garden and eating my bushes, then I'm not so fond of them!. The pics below were taken last Febuary just after Storm Eunice had blown a section of our rear fence down... our garden backs onto a nature reserve, and the Roe deer were keen to come in and see if there was anything to munch... excuse the blurry shots, they were quickly taken through the window at about 6.30am in the morning.




























And these are some pics my neighbour across the road took of one eating my Yew and Hibiscus trees last year.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

Much as I love wildlife, I can see how that is annoying. They're just a larger version of the grey squirrels that plague me - if I don't fill the feeders, they just set out on a destroy mission - "we'll just keep breaking things until you feed us". It's all about context. I'd be happy to watch a squirrel up a tree elsewhere, but mine are just a blasted nuisance - right furry hooligans.

I'd meant to ask you if you either had deer locally or just nosey neighbours, when I saw how tall your fence was. I'm right at the tail end of a nature reserve area, but whilst I've seen a fox and my neighbour had a badger set off his security light one night, I've never personally seen deer locally. But there are obviously some as I've seen the odd carcass at the roadside - a big red stag jumped in front of a truck (the truck won) and closed the road a few years ago, which was a surprise, as we didn't think there would be anything bigger than roe deer around here.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

This is how they got in. You can see the dividing fence between my neighbour and us was down, also, his rear fence into the reserve after the storm. They came in that way. The ones that come into the road at the front do so by jumping over a low post and rail fence further down the cul-de-sac.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

You can see why they'd want to come in to look for treats, it must have smelt and looked very lush after winter woodland.


----------



## Roger the Dodger (Oct 5, 2009)

There's a small herd of about a dozen or so that live in the reserve behind us, and normally they keep themselves to themselves. When that fence was still down, we would see them following each other quite closely in single file along the paths out there. However, at other times they would obviously split up and then you'd hear them calling to each other with loud barks similar to a dog. There would often be several at a time in a chorus, the sounds all coming from different directions, some near and others from quite a distance away. This usually happened early in the morning, but on the odd occasion they would perform their vocalisations in the heat of the day while we were sunbathing in the garden, often for half an hour at a a time.


----------



## BooJewels (Feb 19, 2021)

I've been reading more about deer on this wildlife web site, which is pretty detailed, especially in respect of red deer. When you read about their social groups and activity it mentions how they're sometimes in groups and sometimes separate, largely depending on the food situation and the time of year - so it appear it's more fluid than I was thinking it would be. I've heard them barking in the wild too - a few places I go have roe populations, so I hear them occasionally. The first time I heard a red stag bellowing at the rut was quite an experience. We used to stay in a caravan on a farm in the Lakes with adjacent woodland and we were woken by it one morning - I thought it was a funny time of year for one of their cows to be in labour.

Obviously the deer I photographed above are in a deer park, so differ from wild populations in many respects, as they will be fed in winter, so that will colour their behaviour - but it set me thinking, hence doing some additional reading.

This photo amused me - these two fallow bucks had just been having a rather feeble 'handbags' show of early-rutting strength and then both seemed to run out of steam or motivation or decided it had got too hot in the sun and both flopped down simultaneously for a kip, but neither was prepared to walk away and give up that patch of territory, so they slept like this for a while, back to back and aware of each other.


----------

