Flower

Okay so I got to messing around with the new lens. This is what I came up with.

I'm pretty happy with the result. Nice sharp image, but i think i should have stopped down a bit because the DOF was a bit shallow for this situation(the things in the middle of the flower(don't know what their called) were out of focus because of the shallow DOF. Sharpening was needed.) There was something in the background that was somewhat distracting so I burned it out. But I'm not sure if I liked it with or without. I was going to show the two to see what you guys/gals thought, but accidentaly saved it without saving it as a different file. I do have it on my camera still, so the edit without the burn should be up tomorrow.
Any critisism is welcome(be harsh).

My first reaction was, "It's beautiful!"

The harsh comment (you asked) is that it's dark. It's less that the background is dark, but more that the flower itself could be a bit brighter.

Regardless, it is beautiful! Nice job.

I completely agree with mathogre. Absolutely gorgeous image. I dont think it is to shallow maybe just more of a change in focus point. What in the camera info. Becasue for me it seems that if you were to have stopped it down 1 or 2 stops to much of the background would have come into focus taking away from the pop of photo. Overall though a great shot. If it was shot in raw see if you ca adjust the exposure 1-1.5 stops if not have fun with curves or levels to see if you can bring it out. Again beautiful shot.

Ruke,
It's very beautiful at first look and then upon inspection, it does seem just a little dark. A bit more light would give it more life. I agree with gomez that exposure stops could be adjusted if it was shot raw.

Overall though, it's very nice.

You had about 2.5-3" DOF at 140mm assuming you were about 6 inches from the flower.

Good looking shot, it could be brighter as noted. I think the OOF flowers removed and only having the dark green leafs behind it would only help the flower to stand out more. The stamin all in focus would also not hurt the image at all. (They are called Stamin)

I'd agree but would have to say people get a little too excited about RAW. I never use it and you can definitely get away with making some exposure changes to Fine JPEGs. Don't get me wrong, RAW is great if that's your sort of thing, it just doesn't suit the way I shoot.

If you get the white balance correct, and do not mind working with 8-bit images throughout the workflow then JPEG is fine. RAW only allows you to make adjustments easier after the fact, anything that can be done in RAW on white balance/exposure can be fixed in photoshop with a JPEG it just takes longer.

Now the ability to change the colorspace, white balance, sharpness, or many other items recorded in the JPEG when the photo was taken then shooting RAW comes in handy, but is not for everyone.

You do not have to shoot RAW or shoot in JPEG to create great images, its a matter of preference...I know photogs who do both.

I don't know if there is such thing, but the whole image is too "warm" with no contrast.

In addition to the darkness that everyone has mentioned... your logo detracts from the photograph. Might want to revisit how you're using your mark on this photo and others.

To be REALLY blunt, it's kind of an eye sore. Sorry to be harsh, but it is.

I have a macro lens that I love(canon 100mm 2.8) and the first thing I learnt is the dof is wafer thin. When I take macros I use a tripod and the highest f-stop I can. I like the majority of the flower to be in focus. To make it "pop" even more I go for the most blank background I can. Getting light into your macros can be difficult and a lot of people use a dedicated flash.

I think your photo is pretty good. More of the subject in focus. Less background if you can. More light. Smaller logo.

Don't worry macros are very technically demanding and you did ok.

Just my 2 cents.