Again I am not trying to pick it apart. You have a great start here. With a bit of touch up it can get better.
Again I am not trying to pick it apart. You have a great start here. With a bit of touch up it can get better.
Mu pen photo above is an example of Macro photography. Macro is small but not as small as Micro. and it is one of the most difficult types of photography to get good at. Just so you all know I am not considered "Good" at it. Taking pictures of things like jars of honey woudl fall somewhere between Macro and still life photos. So if anyone is really interested in learning some of the 'Rules" you can search those methods on the net.
I need to get a new camera. mine got broken at the birth of my second grandson who just turned 2. When I do I hope to take a huge number of photos and make an album that is public access. people can then use them as they do they will be sent to them and removed from the data base. Yes I know how to keep them from being used without permission as well.
One trick to taking better photos that worked for me is to look at other photos. lots of them then find those that just really stand out to you. then figure out why the better photos look better.
Lighting is the harder one to see. use of focus is also something that is learned to a great extent.
The real trick is that if you asked someone what the photo is of. will they say a jar of honey? or will they say a basket, flowers and a jar of something. And there are known ways to get that jar of honey out front and the single object in the photo that is noticed. so that people say oh that is a picture of honey. It is hard to do intentionally. Lots of tiny details have to be broguht together. that is why taking the photo outdoors on a cloudy day works so well. ti removes all issues of lighting and color from being something you need to be concerned with. Shadows soften up just right. you don't get harsh bright spots on the subject. You do not want shadows falling on the cloth in front of your object. you don't want half of it so dark you cannot see what it is. you barely want any hint of a shadow anywhere at all. You want detail. if you set everything on a cloth you want to be able to see the threads in that cloth. In this case I want to be able to see the bubbles suspended in that jar of honey. I want to be able to see the honey like I am touching it.
Just some examples of the difference between taking a picture and getting a great photo. Great photos seldom happen by accident. They can. but it will not happen again for a while. Learn how to get them and you will get a lot more of them. You will still take about 100 photos for every one really good one.
I will add this comment that is quite a bit more technical. In any photo you have a distance between the nearest thing that is in focus and the furthest. This is called the depth of field. and it can be controlled. when you are trying to take a picture of a single object that is among many objects you want to figure out how to make your object the only thing in the depth of field. all other things are out of focus at least to a tiny degree. this is so important but very few people ever know about it. it is the single thing I think most people could do to really make a difference in their pictures.
I cannot tell you the number of times I have set up a photo of a pen. and it takes quite a bit of time. to then take the photo look at it and then realize their is some spec of dust or a finger print on the pen. If you cannot see specs of dust on your subject. you did not capture enough detail. In the photo of my pen above the original photo of the pen was that detailed. once I am done cutting pasting adding editing and correcting you cannot see it. but it is why I could do all that and still end up with a sharp picture of a pen.
One more point, not like I like this stuff or anything. We all see the world every day through our own eyes. and our eyes make the world look the way we see it. it is all normal and becomes humdrum. But the camera is capable of making things look slightly different than we see them with our eyes. And doing so will make that thing stand out. it will command attention simply because it looks different than we are used to. I hope that makes since to somebody somewhere. Because it is really the heart of what makes a great photo great. Seeing something like we have never seen it before. with a blurred background for example. we are not used to a drastic change in focus like a camera can do. We are not used to a single object out of the entire scene being the only thing that is clear. Well most of us aren't. We are not used to a bee in flight being dead still so you can count the hairs on it's back. but you can get a photo of one that you will see it. and it will catch your attention.
This is not mine but a great example of everything I am talking about.
Now I will ask a question. is that bee landing or taking off? It does not really matter how you answered that question. what is important is I bet you had an answer instantly. And that is one of those secrets to a really great photo. it shows more than just the object.
I really appreciate the time to help me out with the honey picture. Like you said - you need to take 100 pictures before you end up with a great one. I will keep working on it.
Graham, actually no it wouldn't. It is better to get a photo that says it is honey without the need for words. My pen photo has text added but you woudl have to see the pen in it's intended place. it is along with hundreds of others so the detail that it is a specific pen becomes important. But there is still no brand name on it. That was taken care of in other features of the web page. The photo of the bee needs no words. A great photo of honey will not either. That is part of what is being sought. the photo that needs no words.
Take a look at these, very few have lables.
I will add a few of my favorites for those not inclined to click on the link
Okay last one stinks on the focus issue but was a great idea.
The second one. Now that is getting it all together and knowing what to do with it.
There are examples on that page that go to far as well. I tried to add one to this post but keep getting an invalid file response. not sure why it comes from the same page as the spoon.
Now compare the above to this.
Which do you prefer? And that really is an important question. because it is like asking which is better. Chocolate or Vanilla. Neither answer is wrong. The real question is. Did you get what you pictured in your mind?
The photo of the honey dipper is very attractive. But ... a "product" picture implies we are promoting a specific product. Not just honey, but my honey, or your honey.
If you promote your honey with a honey jar that doesn't include a label, my first impression is that its a generic photo, perhaps a purchased stock photo. That is not going to impress me. As I see it, the goal is not to produce award winning photos. The goal is to sell your honey.
But perhaps I'm just the suspicious type. :eek: :lookout::rolleyes:
Like I said. go look at that page. see for yourself how often a label is used in the photo. Then click on some of them and see how the brand name is handled. Look at photos of honey with labels and those without and see which ones tend to strike you as the best. For me I don't know how you could get a great honey photo and have the label in it. I might edit it in later if I am making a banner out of the image or something.
In all it becomes TMI for the photo. take a great photo then worry about the other information. Now if I wanted a great photo of my label. yes of course it will be on the jar.
As for the suspicious stuff. how do I know the honey in your jar with your label came from your bees? I genuinely suspect that of our local honey marketers. You don't fix that sort of thing with a photo.
For me the vanilla photo above is neither a great photo of the honey or the label. so get it together and get one or the other. but that was a waste of web space as far as I am concerned. Now can I just jump up and go get a better one. probably not. it takes a lot of time, effort, equipment and work to get them.
Frankly, IMO, ;) the product photos in the Berkshire Bee post #6 - that feature their label prominently on the jar - are more effective at promoting their product than anything posted in later posts.
That photo does include some jars without labels. Its difficult for me to to say whether I would find it more appealing if each jar had a label, without seeing a second version of that photo. Incorporating into the Berkshire Bee photo a version of the honey dipper like in DY's post #26 with an open honey jar might be very appealing.
Graham, What someone likes is tailor made to each individual. But photographically it is a disaster. light is far to harsh. take in on a cloudy day. Hang a sheet up between the sun and the subject to defuse the harsh light.
Now what does that harsh light do. it bleeches out the colors for one. it flattens the image. it creates very dark shadows. you never want to see that much shadow in a product image. the jar without a label on the lower left looks like it has something stuck in it and lint floating in it. The depth of field is way to long . Move the camera back and zoom in to get the jars of honey as the sharpest thing in the photo. Intentionally keep the scenery out of focus. There are hot spots on every object in the photo and the composition runs off the left side while there is empty space on the right. Upper right is to bright upper left is to dark.
Overall I see pumpkins and flowers before I see jars of honey. Even in the case of the image being blown up you cannot see the label. Can you read it? I don't mean the brand name I am talking about the fine print. Can you really see that label? The entire photo has that effect. I see label but I cannot see the entire label. I see honey but I cannot really see it. In all it comes up short. and in most cases quite a bit short.
Graham. I see nothing wrong with anyone s taste as far a good better or even best. But technically that photo is a wreck. And that is indisputable. the technical aspect of photography is well defined in minute detail. and that picture misses to a serious degree in almost every aspect. to harsh of light to deep of shadows. far to much contrast demonstrated no better than in the upper corners where one is to bright the other to dark. hot spots flushed out color and flattened image.
What is the photo supposed to be of. Pumpkins. Flowers Honey or Label? Pick one and i can describe why it was not captured well. You cannot read the label even when it is blown up. the honey in the jar without a label at the lower left looks like it has stuff floating in it and you see the reflection of the planter behind it like there is something stuck in the jar. not a good photo of honey if you ask me. that jar would be better off with a label on it. The depth of field is far to long and my eye cannot decide just what to settle on. I spend more time looking at pumpkins than I do honey.
Is it a good average picture. Yes. is it a great photo? not even close. And there is a ton that can be done to improve it.
So, DY, I said the Berkshire Bee product photo was the most appealing one in this thread [limiting that statement to photos of a specific producer's honey]. I have read your technical comments, but show me the money, err ... honey! Where is the better honey product photo?
Graham, I will have to look for one later. I am on my way to breakfast with my wife. today is our 29th anniversary.
Graham, Okay. looking at you as the customer and attempting to get your desires along with still getting quality photography in it. here is what I found with just a quick search.
I like the light better. the label better. you don't see enough honey for me and still a very similar arrangement as photo in post 6. Sorry the photo will not upload so I will have to give you a link to the page.
Depth of field is still off for me the label could be even better. but for a quick search and still demonstrate some of the points I am talking about this fits.
Softer light. muted shadows a label you can read nearly ever letter of every word. Round objects look round colors are not faded. Now set a decorative jar of honey with a dipper or something next to it and you will be firing on far more cylinders. give them a look at that golden liquid as well. A flat label on a flat sided jar would work better to display the label. But they bottle it in what they bottle it in. Like I said I am not sure you can get a good honey and a good label photo in one shot from one jar.
Here was a brave attempt and as far as I am concerned it is also a disaster that honey looks like crap. Yeah I am hard to please. Way to dark and the background stinks.
Same idea done much better and probably the best product with label showing the honey I will find.
Again well done the background suffers just a bit being two tone. but they get points for the creativity in showing the honey itself. wish they had done that on a larger scale. Honey not as visible.
There is enough there for anyone that is interested in seeing the difference to do so. Whether you like it or not is personal taste. as I said some are going for the home grown look.
Just a humorous to me side note. I have received a lot of guesses as to who the girl in the photo is. Many guess my wife or daughter. She is actually my niece. This is my wife and myself. Not a photo of mine. I actually have a better photo of my wife that I took but cannot find it at the moment. Much more like the one I got of our niece.
Okay found it. best recent photo of my wife. we celebrated 29 years of marriage yesterday.
and yeah I think she is hot as all get out.
Now you're really just showing off. :)