In the flower bed, again...

rwells

Ok Tom,

I've got your back! I'll not let you go down this path alone :rofl



Broke out my old 30D that hasn't seen daylight in a long, long time!

NeilL

rwells wrote: »

Ok Tom,

I've got your back! I'll not let you go down this path alone

Broke out my old 30D that hasn't seen daylight in a long, long time!

Does this path go "backwards", then, Randy, you need your old 30D for it?

Looks like you're getting into fertilising flowers, too, with #1!

Good to get out of your comfort zone, they say. Next you'll be taking portraits. Or do you do that already, can't recall just at the moment? Well, I think this is related, as you might know.



Neil

EDIT: You snuck a new one in since I wrote, #4. You are getting the idea! It's very good! I'm not completely sold on the texturising, but I see what you're getting at. And check the whites aren't gone over to the other side. 5 each, you're giving me some hot competition.:jose

rwells

NeilL wrote: »

Does this path go "backwards", then, Randy, you need your old 30D for it?

Looks like you're getting into fertilising flowers, too, with #1!

Good to get out of your comfort zone, they say. Next you'll be taking portraits. Or do you do that already, can't recall just at the moment? Well, I think this is related, as you might know.



Neil

EDIT: You snuck a new one in since I wrote, #4. You are getting the idea! It's very good! I'm not completely sold on the texturising, but I see what you're getting at. And check the whites aren't gone over to the other side. 5 each, you're giving me some hot competition.:jose

Hey Neil,

I shoot portaits, albiet, that's not my favorite thing to shoot, but it does pay...

Yep, snuck one in while your back was turned

Whatever those little white flowers are, they are the dickens to keep from blowing out. As you see in the last photo of the same flowers, to keep from blowing the whites, the image must be shot underexposed, significantly. (spot metering no less) I have been intriqued by these little rascals ability to do this. I have shot them with 3 different camera bodies, with the same results. Mind you, I'm fairly familiar with exposing images

NASA needs to investigate their reflective properties!

DaddyO

Nice your not letting Tom hang it out there alone. Bashful with flowers
pics like he is. hehe. Good on ya.

Its my experience that flowers are often a serious problem for exposure.
Even in what appears to be great lighting conditions.
Under exposure often nessesary to even get in the right neighborhood. When doing so, it will not insure a workable / or easily worked shot in PP.

One thing I have seen with consistancy is that overcast skies are beneficial to imaging flowers as Ront displays in this thread here in other cool shots. Hope he doesn't mind my pointing to it.

http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=177569

Shade is often a friend but not always. Still, like you, I wonder what the
heck is up when no matter what I do there are annoying blowouts,
whatever, regardless.

Hey, I love the PP effect applied to your image 4. Nice subtle shift leaving
a very credible appealing image for what it is. I'd do the same in a heartbeat if I felt I liked what I was seeing from the effort. I know your
good for that when ever it fits your fancy. And you do it well in
moderation or otherwise. Good on ya again.

More please

NeilL

rwells wrote: »

Hey Neil,

I shoot portaits, albiet, that's not my favorite thing to shoot, but it does pay...

Yep, snuck one in while your back was turned

Whatever those little white flowers are, they are the dickens to keep from blowing out. As you see in the last photo of the same flowers, to keep from blowing the whites, the image must be shot underexposed, significantly. (spot metering no less) I have been intriqued by these little rascals ability to do this. I have shot them with 3 different camera bodies, with the same results. Mind you, I'm fairly familiar with exposing images

NASA needs to investigate their reflective properties!

Yeah, shoot them in indirect light and use a reflector. You can bracket if everything is fairly still and you are quick. Otherwise you can do something in post, eg with #5 duplicate and blend with Screen, adjust to taste and add saturation etc. Etc! Which you know already any way, so useless information.

I'll be going down that path to your portraits.

Neil

rwells

DaddyO wrote: »

Nice your not letting Tom hang it out there alone. Bashful with flowers
pics like he is. hehe. Good on ya.

Its my experience that flowers are often a serious problem for exposure.
Even in what appears to be great lighting conditions.
Under exposure often nessesary to even get in the right neighborhood. When doing so, it will not insure a workable / or easily worked shot in PP.

One thing I have seen with consistancy is that overcast skies are beneficial to imaging flowers as Ront displays in this thread here in other cool shots. Hope he doesn't mind my pointing to it.

http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=177569

Shade is often a friend but not always. Still, like you, I wonder what the
heck is up when no matter what I do there are annoying blowouts,
whatever, regardless.

Hey, I love the PP effect applied to your image 4. Nice subtle shift leaving
a very credible appealing image for what it is. I'd do the same in a heartbeat if I felt I liked what I was seeing from the effort. I know your
good for that when ever it fits your fancy. And you do it well in
moderation or otherwise. Good on ya again.

More please

Hey Michael,

Nice of you to stop by.

I don't often have any issues with exposing flower shots correctly, but these little rascals...they are un-cooperative to say the least. Like I stated before, I've never seen a flower (or anything that I can remember) that shuns a good image to be taken of it. I've shot them in the sun, in the shade, with different lenses and bodies. Even underexposed a great deal, you can barely hold any texture in them. They just don't care

I'll finally get fed-up with em' and stalk them till I get a good shot, like it or not!!!

Here's a shot I took a while back ~ easy peasy (posted previously)



Thanks for taking the time and effort to lend a helping hand

black mamba

Yo Randy,

Thanks for not leaving me out on the trail all alone.

I look at your work here and and it crystallizes my resolve to leave this whole arena of shooting flowers to others with more skills than I have. As you know, I have a great reticence to engage in any serious PP work and it is obvious that, very often, that's the only way to:

1 ) save an otherwise less than satisfactory shot or

2 ) bring into play some degree of artistically desired presentation,
which often seems endemic to flower photography

I look at the struggles you.... a far more accomplished shooter than myself.... can go through trying to capture the real essence of flowers. I'm going to leave my share of those miseries to you folks better suited to coping with them.:D

Take care,

Tom

rwells

black mamba wrote: »

Yo Randy,

Thanks for not leaving me out on the trail all alone.

I look at your work here and and it crystallizes my resolve to leave this whole arena of shooting flowers to others with more skills than I have. As you know, I have a great reticence to engage in any serious PP work and it is obvious that, very often, that's the only way to:

1 ) save an otherwise less than satisfactory shot or

2 ) bring into play some degree of artistically desired presentation,
which often seems endemic to flower photography

I look at the struggles you.... a far more accomplished shooter than myself.... can go through trying to capture the real essence of flowers. I'm going to leave my share of those miseries to you folks better suited to coping with them.:D

Take care,

Tom

Alright Tom,

I chased you down this trail, now I hear you say that it wasn't for you in the first place. Well, I might be a little slow, but I'm no lagger

The "Bait-n-Switch" trail will be traveled only sparingly, only when other, more suitable trails are washed out...

Stephany

'Whatever those little white flowers are'

Periwinkles

Dogdots

Hey Randy --

Nice photos -- you should visit the flower bed more often. The first one is so dreamy looking .... perfect for a kitchen wall

rwells

Stephany wrote: »

'Whatever those little white flowers are'

Periwinkles

Thank you Stephany!

rwells

Dogdots wrote: »

Hey Randy --

Nice photos -- you should visit the flower bed more often. The first one is so dreamy looking .... perfect for a kitchen wall

Thanks for your comments Mary!

NeilL

black mamba wrote: »

Yo Randy,

Thanks for not leaving me out on the trail all alone.

I look at your work here and and it crystallizes my resolve to leave this whole arena of shooting flowers to others with more skills than I have. As you know, I have a great reticence to engage in any serious PP work and it is obvious that, very often, that's the only way to:

1 ) save an otherwise less than satisfactory shot or

2 ) bring into play some degree of artistically desired presentation,
which often seems endemic to flower photography

I look at the struggles you.... a far more accomplished shooter than myself.... can go through trying to capture the real essence of flowers. I'm going to leave my share of those miseries to you folks better suited to coping with them.:D

Take care,

Tom

Tom, I'm in the same lay-by state with landscapes. Everything I've done gives me the shudders! Whenever I discover an outstanding view, some voice in me shouts, "No!".

But don't we go in cycles (if not on them as good greenies do!:D)? I'm waiting for landscapes to come back around again. And then watch out!

Neil