Orchids

Deacon

Trying some flower shots, hand held, 17-35mm most in aperature priority.











Tried to use wider aperature to defocus background, shooting 1-3 ft distances, probably should have stopped down 1-2 steps for more depth of field, but I do like the softness and non-technical feel

Deacon

cmr164

Deacon wrote:

Trying some flower shots, hand held, 17-35mm most in aperature priority.

Nice series. I like the dark backgrounds, probably would like the background blurred more and would like the first to be less centered. (It made me look for the Girl Scout Cookie box )

Tried to use wider aperature to defocus background, shooting 1-3 ft distances, probably should have stopped down 1-2 steps for more depth of field, but I do like the softness and non-technical feel

Deacon

Ok, you used the Nikon D2H and Elements 2.0 on a Mac running Panther to do your editing but I don't see the EXIF data for exposure & focal length in the files. Elements must drop it in the editing.

What I don't understand is why the 17-35. At those distances the image from the 17-35 must have been small enough to make you crop out a lot. I would like to see you do the shots again with a 50mm or longer.

Just random thoughts.....

Deacon

Orchid Comments
This was shot at a home and garden show, and I miswrote. It was a 28-70 and most of the shots were in the 50-70 range. There was a black curtain surrounding most of the exhibits and the hall was dark except for theatrical lighing. Tried shooting around people etc, no ability for tri or monopod, not allowed. Looking back, I should have varied the exposures but viewing the shots on the display, they looked better to me than when I viewed them on computer. These were originals, no adjustment in PS. only resizing them for Smugmug. Learning always, thanks for the comments.

Deacon

cmr164

Deacon wrote:

This was shot at a home and garden show, and I miswrote. It was a 28-70 and most of the shots were in the 50-70 range.

Ok, that makes a lot more sense. Thanks for clarifying.

There was a black curtain surrounding most of the exhibits and the hall was dark except for theatrical lighing. Tried shooting around people etc, no ability for tri or monopod, not allowed. Looking back, I should have varied the exposures but viewing the shots on the display, they looked better to me than when I viewed them on computer.

They look very good on my display.

These were originals, no adjustment in PS. only resizing them for Smugmug. Learning always, thanks for the comments.

Deacon

If these were cropped, it would be cool to see the xxxx-O.jpg images on smugmug be the original uncropped jpegs either from the camera or if you were shooting raw from the acquisition s/w.

Course since I don't use smugmug, I do not know if it allows you to put a cropped resized xxx-M.jpg while having a true original xxx-O.jpg . Does it? Or does it do the xxx-M.jpg automagically from the xxx-O.jpg itself?

Deacon

Orchids at Smugmug
Here is the link to Smugmug so you can see the photos uploaded, sized only. I am not sure I understand your question, but you have to resize the photos prior to uploading a number of them. I can upload one image, full res for your comparison.

Deacon

ps, new camera, lots to learn, thanks

wxwax

Smugmug generates four sizes of any photo, assuming the photo is large enough to support them: small, medium, large and original. You can upload the same photo more than once (DAMHIK) or variations of a photo. It doesn't care.

Deacon

Full size image
Here is one shot at full size upload Full Size Orchid

Deacon

cmr164

Deacon wrote:

Here is one shot at full size upload Full Size Orchid

Deacon

That is a 34k 880x530 image that has been processed with all embedded info removed. Not exactly what I meant But never mind, it is not worth struggling over.

Deacon

Reshoot at the Orchid Barn
Thanks for the suggestions, here are some shots from the next day...















Full set, bracketed, take a look at Orchids 2a

fish

I love orchids...they're the most exotic and sexy flowers in existence. Very very difficult to grow in captivity, which is strange, since most of them grow wild in the rainforests of south america. We have a few in the house and it's amazing how long they take to bloom...IF they bloom. The Phalaenopsis will put out a spike and the buds will form over the course of six to eight months. It's not a fast growing plant at all. They are also fairly difficult to photograph, because they are usually very deep flowers, so you need a hefty DOF to capture the entire flower, meaning you usually don't get much background blurring. Portable backgrounds are helpful...even a black tshirt duct-taped up behind it works.

Nice shots, Deacon.

cmr164

Deacon wrote:

Thanks for the suggestions, here are some shots from the next day...


Full set, bracketed, take a look at Orchids 2a

The orchids are beautiful and you are doing a good job with focus and composition so I hope you forgive a nit about the smugmug images....

I would like to see larger images that are not so highly compressed on smugmug. Some of your "original" images are 40k or less and the medium ones 10k-20k. At those compressions the artifacts have visible degradations.

I just did some math and the reduced images I am displaying here average 54k and the originals that folks can click to average 651k.

I don't know about the others but I would really like to see some of your shots in a one-step-from-raw form that would allow me to blow it up on my screen, play with settings and cropping .... hopefully resulting in useful feedback to you.

Deacon

Orchids
Fish,

In our last house we had an attached greenhouse, two 12x24 areas with seperate cliimate controls. I don't need to go into all the details of auto sun shades, humidification etc but it was a full on deal. We grew orchids from small starts but never got into cloneing etc. Biggest secret to them is leave them alone! They are air plants and the only reason for "watering" is to privide a medium for fertilizer to get to the plants. We potted most of them in large bark chips or river rock. Some of them just hung off wire grids.

These shots were done at a show, tough to use a t-shirt so you have to rely on using the existing backdrops. Studio/garage shooting allows much more control of lighting etc. These shots were done with flash and existing "show" lighting.

Deacon

Deacon

How To...
Charles, The only way I know how to get the pics up to the Dgrin site is to load them on Smugmug. If you can, please tell me how and where I can upload the full size images shot in RAW. I used a setting in the D2 that yields both Raw and Jpeg of each shot so both are available at full size of roughly 2 mgs. each. Appreciate the help and info.

Greg Heinze

cmr164 wrote:

The orchids are beautiful and you are doing a good job with focus and composition so I hope you forgive a nit about the smugmug images....

I would like to see larger images that are not so highly compressed on smugmug. Some of your "original" images are 40k or less and the medium ones 10k-20k. At those compressions the artifacts have visible degradations.

I just did some math and the reduced images I am displaying here average 54k and the originals that folks can click to average 651k.

I don't know about the others but I would really like to see some of your shots in a one-step-from-raw form that would allow me to blow it up on my screen, play with settings and cropping .... hopefully resulting in useful feedback to you.

cmr164

Deacon wrote:

Charles, The only way I know how to get the pics up to the Dgrin site is to load them on Smugmug. If you can, please tell me how and where I can upload the full size images shot in RAW. I used a setting in the D2 that yields both Raw and Jpeg of each shot so both are available at full size of roughly 2 mgs. each. Appreciate the help and info.

Greg Heinze

Nothing wrong with using smugmug! I was just asking you to have the 'original' ( xxx-O.jpg) size images be closer to being a full size. Obviously I use my own iisc.com site for hosting images so I do not know the limitations or restrictions on smugmug but I have seen folks post much bigger image files from smugmug so I know it is possible.

Deacon

RAW images
OK, think I figured things out. Uploading a group of pics in Raw full size, should be ready in a few minutes, I will post the link in a few minutes, this takes a long time!

Deacon

OK 8 misc photos uploaded at full values, not modified.:

Orchids Large Format

Charles, let me know if this worked and then I will select a few specific ones for your comment.

cmr164

Deacon wrote:

OK, think I figured things out. Uploading a group of pics in Raw full size, should be ready in a few minutes, I will post the link in a few minutes, this takes a long time!

Deacon

OK 8 misc photos uploaded at full values, not modified.:

Orchids Large Format

Charles, let me know if this worked and then I will select a few specific ones for your comment.

It is showing the 160x160 thumnails. Try uploading the largest size jpegs instead of the raw.

Deacon

Click on "Originals"
Charles,

OK, JPEG seems to work. When you click on Original under photo it brings the full sized file up.

Greg

Go to the same link above.

wxwax

cmr164 wrote:

It is showing the 160x160 thumnails. Try uploading the largest size jpegs instead of the raw.

Click on the thumbnails. When it gives you the bigger image, click on that too. Then use the drop down box to select Original. Or am I giving the right answer to the wrong question?

cmr164

wxwax wrote:

Click on the thumbnails. When it gives you the bigger image, click on that too. Then use the drop down box to select Original. Or am I giving the right answer to the wrong question?

That only works when there are jpegs. He put some up now See below... RSN

cmr164

Deacon wrote:

Charles,

OK, JPEG seems to work. When you click on Original under photo it brings the full sized file up.

Greg

Go to the same link above.

Now the monster (me) cropper has been let loose

How about

cmr164

Deacon wrote:

OK, JPEG seems to work.

Greg;

These really are great shots and it is such a pleasure to play with the full size images.

Here is another

cmr164

Greg;

The last one I have time to play with today.

Deacon

Pushing
Thanks for the input and modifications of the photos Charles. You're comments pushed me to go back and reshoot with a different eye and new methods. Very much worthwhile...

Greg

cmr164

Deacon wrote:

Thanks for the input and modifications of the photos Charles. You're comments pushed me to go back and reshoot with a different eye and new methods. Very much worthwhile...

Greg

Feel free to add *your* eye and comments to my shots when you run across them in various threads. That is the greatest thing here... getting critiques and fresh viewpoints.

Deacon

One of my favorites
Charles et al.

full sized image available here,



Deacon

lynnma

Deacon wrote:

Charles et al.

full sized image available here,



Deacon

ooooh thats lovely... I'll leave the crop playing for Charles..:)

Sam

Deacon wrote:

Charles et al.

full sized image available here,



Deacon

Very nice!

cmr164

lynnma wrote:

ooooh thats lovely... I'll leave the crop playing for Charles..:)

It's spectacular and I'm not wanting to touch it! Maybe waxy wants a go at it...

Deacon

Changes
The journey heads in a new direction. I have been involved in photography for over 40 years since high school. Editor of this and that, criminalologist/photog in the Army, hobby, publications and websites. There is not a day that goes by that I don't find something new to work on and learn. Thanks for the push and making me keep my eyes open.

Deacon

Photos...

wxwax

cmr164 wrote:

It's spectacular and I'm not wanting to touch it! Maybe waxy wants a go at it...

Not me, that looks really nice!