I was going to leave this alone, but I am not.
So here goes:
You forget that I stack photos, sometimes 100 layers deep, so yes, hundreds of thousands of photographs.
So you're trying to say that you take 100-layer, stacked images taken of flighty subjects
in the wild?
Whatever you say, Michael
I am not going to waste any more time with you.
Trust me when I tell you,
my own time has been wasted as well.
This started off as a good natured thread topic, but you kept trying to digress into your own little territory, flower stacks at home, completely missing the point of the topic.
I am sorry if you feel embarrassed by "overstating" your own case, and having your own article refute everything you have said here on this thread topic.
Your entire struggle here is the simple fact that,
not once, have you kept your eye on the ball and dealt with the subject:
wildlife macro imagery (which, I agree, makes this entire diatribe a waste of time).
You had your own say,
on your own thread topic (which I gave you the respect to leave alone), but you and your ego just could
not allow another person (me) to offer another perspective, on another thread topic, dealing with another lens offering advantages (to another kind of macro shooting:
wildlife) the features for which your pet studio lens simply (and utterly) lacks.
The very fact that you couldn't get results from your own pet lens, in non-controlled situations, as described in your own article,
should have been silencing ... but (unfortunately) it was not
Here are a few wildlife photos of critters I took:
http://hwcdn.libsyn.com/p/3/3/3/3339ef0cdc6ddf82/Small_Worlds_--_Sentient_Beings_Vol-1.pdf?c_id=8358140&expiration=1454551550&hwt=b8a6ad711276b5d9f971fa283e1159d4
Of the 53 images provided in that link, I would say only 6 were semi-impressive, and (maybe) the same amount could be properly classified as wildlife imagery.
(The last 4 were your best.)
The rest appeared to be the common garden photography of a beginner.
I honestly think you have a real knack for studio-stack flower photography ... and it shows.
And I honestly still think what you
call "wildlife" macro photography is actually
early-morning garden photography ... that you delude yourself into thinking is something other than what it really is.
(Slugs, snails, bees, flies, garden orbs, etc.?
)
Jack
Also, and with no malice stated, there was a massive quality degradation in the .pdf format of your eBook. Even when I downloaded it, every single image looked like 500 px images blown up to 1920 px wide.
It would be more helpful if you would post the original, individual high-res images of those "hundreds of thousands" of 100-image wildlife macro stacks you say you have.