water lillies (sigh)

Harryb · June 2, 2005

Hi you'll

I critiqued some flower shots today and I said that I would post some of mine own.

This should be the last time. Quick and I hope painless.

same shot but with some detail taken out. Do you have a preference?

the last one

USAIR · June 2, 2005

Harry
Well I like flower shots

I really have a hard time picking just one here but the one without detail has my attention.
Very nice

Care to share how you removed the detail ?

Thanks
Fred

Harryb · June 2, 2005

USAIR wrote:

Well I like flower shots
I really have a hard time picking just one here but the one without detail has my attention.
Very nice

Care to share how you removed the detail ?

Thanks
Fred

Hey Fred,

Glad you liked them. I used a plug-n called buZZ.Pro on that second shot. I use it when I get into a rare artsy-fartsy mood.

jwear · June 2, 2005

I am going with fred the second one but i looked for 10 min. for the duck before i read it

bfjr · June 2, 2005

Hi Harry
Stick to Birds

:lol4 , no just kiddin, no really :hide

1st one for me, don't care for artsy fartsy

Oh yeah like the last one too

rahmonster · June 2, 2005

Hi Harry:D

Well, I think I agree I like the 2nd version better. But I really like the composition in the last one, with the partial leaf in the foreground and the flower top left and the great reflection.

gaylenick · June 2, 2005

Harry -

The shot I like the best is shot #1. After scrolling back and forth between 1 and 2 for a few minutes, I like the way the sun light plays on the water droplets on the lilly pads and sometimes below them. The second and third shots are wonderful also, number 1 just stands out for me.

Gayle

Harryb wrote:

Hi you'll

I critiqued some flower shots today and I said that I would post some of mine own. This should be the last time. Quick and I hope painless.

same shot but with some detail taken out. Do you have a preference?

the last one

nightingale · June 3, 2005

Harryb wrote:

Hi you'll

I critiqued some flower shots today and I said that I would post some of mine own. This should be the last time. Quick and I hope painless.

same shot but with some detail taken out. Do you have a preference?

the last one

#1 definitely! I think you lost some sharpness when you took out the details. #2 looks like it is smudged.

BigAl · June 3, 2005

Definitely #1 for me. I like the detail.

regards
alan

Harryb · June 3, 2005

jwear wrote:

I am going with fred the second one but i looked for 10 min. for the duck before i read it

The Duck!!! I knew i forgot something!

Thanks Jeff

gus · June 3, 2005

I'll pay that 2nd one harry...got a funny feel to it (in a nice way but it is quite odd the way it draws you into it) The water looks pastel.

WaterfallRich · June 3, 2005

Hi Harry - the 2nd image caught my eye also even tho I would generally prefer shots with more detail. I like the angle you chose to shoot from. I like the reflection in the 3rd shot and the image overall. Nice job on both - nothing to be ashamed of!

Rufio220 · June 3, 2005

I don't know which one i like between 1 and 2.

I looked at both for a while and i'm not sure....hmmm.

snapapple · June 3, 2005

Hi Harry,
I like the last one. The artsy one did not appeal to me. I like the reflection and the drops in the last one. I go for lots of detail and sharpness.

Harryb · June 3, 2005

bfjr wrote:

Hi Harry
Stick to Birds :lol4 , no just kiddin, no really :hide

1st one for me, don't care for artsy fartsy
Oh yeah like the last one too

Hey Ben,

You don't like artsy-fartsy? :pissed I'm so disappointed. :cry Not really I'm not that crazy about it myself.

Every once in a while I have to do a non-bird pic.

ginger_55 · June 4, 2005

Harry, I think they are too saturated. Flowers are fragile, a feminine thing, usually. (Just don't try the cactus in the clown flower pot: a joke been making the rds of the net for years.)

Harry, I will post some of my flowers, they were in the water, not water lillies, but in the water..............

You can tear the hell out of them, for some reason my family is very partial to them, and I think they are rather nice, too.

I wonder if saturating flowers like you did can kill them.

ginger

Harryb · June 4, 2005

rahmonster wrote:

Hi Harry:D

Well, I think I agree I like the 2nd version better. But I really like the composition in the last one, with the partial leaf in the foreground and the flower top left and the great reflection.

Thanks. I like the last shot best myself.

rutt · June 4, 2005

These are beautiful, Harry, but they can be even better with a little LAB curve work.

The flower itself has a beautiful glow. I enhanced this by moving the lightness endpoint of the L curve in just a touch. I enhanced the contrast within the flower by steepening the highlights in the L curve. The image didn't have a real black point, so I moved the darkness endpoint of the L curve inward until there was one. This also has the welcome side effect of enhancing contrast and detail throughout the midtones.

Whenever there is vegetation, consider A+B steepening in order to bring out the color contrasts in the greens and flower colors. Here it made both the lilly pads greener and also enhanced the yellow glow in the flowers.

4labs · June 4, 2005

Definately #1 Harry. Every Bird shot you ever posted has been great, wish you would post some more often..

Harryb · June 4, 2005

Hiya Gayle,

It was great seeing you again yesterday BTW. #3 is my pic mostly because of the comp but I like the light bette in the first. Thanks for your comments.

Harryb · June 4, 2005

nightingale wrote:

#1 definitely! I think you lost some sharpness when you took out the details. #2 looks like it is smudged.

The idea of the effect is to simplify the shot and it removes detail and gives it a painterly effect. I agree with you though and like #1 better also.

Harryb · June 4, 2005

BigAl wrote:

Definitely #1 for me. I like the detail.

regards
alan

Thanks Alan for the response.

Harryb · June 4, 2005

Humungus wrote:

I'll pay that 2nd one harry...got a funny feel to it (in a nice way but it is quite odd the way it draws you into it) The water looks pastel.

Thanks Gus. The idea behind tha plug-in is to give a painterly effect to the shot.

Harryb · June 4, 2005

WaterfallRich wrote:

Hi Harry - the 2nd image caught my eye also even tho I would generally prefer shots with more detail. I like the angle you chose to shoot from. I like the reflection in the 3rd shot and the image overall. Nice job on both - nothing to be ashamed of!

Thanks Rich. I don't shoot flowers much anymore because they are relly hard to shoot and come up with something that hasn't been done 100 times before.

rutt · June 4, 2005

Harryb wrote:

Thanks Rich. I don't shoot flowers much anymore because they are relly hard to shoot and come up with something that hasn't been done 100 times before.

I agree with this, but when you find yourself feeling complacent about flower shots and want to see some real creativity applied to the subject, check out the flower shots by Irving Penn and Dain Tasker. These couldn't be more different. Tasker was a Los Angeles radiologist working in the 1930s. He had the idea of taking X-Ray flower shots. His work is very startling and different:

You can buy a book of Tasker's work (highly recommended) from Panopticon Gallery: http://www.panopt.com/ I forget how much these cost, but it's not too much.

Irving Penn, along with Avedon, is one of the two great American fashion photographers from the 50s and 60s who transcended their day jobs and became great all around photographers and artists.

Once again, this is sort of a book plug, but this book is out of print and a bit rare. Amazon has them used starting at $83. I know this is kind of a lot for a photography book, but it's a fraction of the cost of a new lens or something and might do more for your photography. In fact I feel that way about all the Irving Penn books.

We may not be as creative as these guys, but their work shows just how differently it is possible to see even flowers, one of the most "over exposed" areas of photography.

Harryb · June 4, 2005

snapapple wrote:

I like the last one. The artsy one did not appeal to me. I like the reflection and the drops in the last one. I go for lots of detail and sharpness.

Thanks for our response Snappy.

Harryb · June 4, 2005

ginger_55 wrote:

Harry, I think they are too saturated. Flowers are fragile, a feminine thing, usually. (Just don't try the cactus in the clown flower pot: a joke been making the rds of the net for years.)

Harry, I will post some of my flowers, they were in the water, not water lillies, but in the water..............

You can tear the hell out of them, for some reason my family is very partial to them, and I think they are rather nice, too.

I wonder if saturating flowers like you did can kill them.

ginger

Hey Ginger,

The only saturation on those shots was done by ma nature. The only post on #1 and #3 was sharpening, set a gray point in curves to adjust the WB, and minor cropping for composition.

Harryb · June 4, 2005

rutt wrote:

These are beautiful, Harry, but they can be even better with a little LAB curve work.

The flower itself has a beautiful glow. I enhanced this by moving the lightness endpoint of the L curve in just a touch. I enhanced the contrast within the flower by steepening the highlights in the L curve. The image didn't have a real black point, so I moved the darkness endpoint of the L curve inward until there was one. This also has the welcome side effect of enhancing contrast and detail throughout the midtones.

Whenever there is vegetation, consider A+B steepening in order to bring out the color contrasts in the greens and flower colors. Here it made both the lilly pads greener and also enhanced the yellow glow in the flowers.

Hey Rutt,

Thanks for the info. I can definitely see the difference.

ginger_55 · June 4, 2005

Harryb wrote:

Hey Ginger,

The only saturation on those shots was done by ma nature. The only post on #1 and #3 was sharpening, set a gray point in curves to adjust the WB, and minor cropping for composition.

I forgot this thread. Maybe I can post my flowers, not much to blow,smile.

I just looked at 1 and 3.....................something bothers me.

really does, it could just be apples and oranges, who knows.

Please look at mine, but I have to feed the dogs before I can do anything.

ginger

Mike-Photos · June 4, 2005

Hi Harry...
Definitely #1 for me, I like detail, and there's plenty of it there!

#3 is also nice, but I prefer simpler - there are too many elements for me, so it doesn't tell a single story. Just my preference, of course.

Mike

Harryb · June 4, 2005

4labs wrote:

Definately #1 Harry. Every Bird shot you ever posted has been great, wish you would post some more often..

Thanks Eric and that was a very nice way of telling me to stick to birds in the future.

water lillies (sigh)

Comments