Flower in natural light

[annie5154]

I received some lovely flowers at the weekend and thought I would practice taking some pictures using only natural light. I would be happy to hear your thoughts, both images have been post processed in PS CS5. Thanks for looking.

#1


#2

[Bobobird]

Beautifully done, you can almost feel the textures.

[annie5154]

Thank you Bobo

Beautifully done, you can almost feel the textures.

[Donald]

Beautifully done, you can almost feel the textures.

What the man said!

One comment in respect of each:

In the first one, I wonder if the edge of the flower is a bit too close up against the left-hand edge of the frame and, perhaps even more debatable, I wonder if in the second one the background at the top of the flower is too similar to it (the main subject) resulting in the flower blending into the background a bit too much. I suspect there will be different views about that one. I am not sure that it doesn't work well. What are your own thoughts?

[annie5154]

What the man said!

One comment in respect of each:

In the first one, I wonder if the edge of the flower is a bit too close up against the left-hand edge of the frame and, perhaps even more debatable, I wonder if in the second one the background at the top of the flower is too similar to it (the main subject) resulting in the flower blending into the background a bit too much. I suspect there will be different views about that one. I am not sure that it doesn't work well. What are your own thoughts?

Thanks Donald I appreciate your comments, and I do agree with what you say about #1. I did crop the image to disregard a very distracting flower which seemed out of place. I should have seen this through the viewfinder when I took it, but didn't and that is one of the things I am working on. On seeing your comment on #2, I also have to agree with you, it is very similar, and I probably didn't pay too much attention to it because I was trying to work out if the yellow and green at the bottom right of the picture were distracting I am pleased with the final results but am very grateful for the constructive feedback, it helps me to learn. Thanks again. Anne

[Mike Buckley]

The lighting in the first one is almost mysterious. I only wish there was more space around the subject, though I understand from an earlier post that there were other nearby flowers that apparently prevented that from happening.

The second one has exactly the opposite affect on me, as it is an extremely pleasing menagerie of color that complements the subject very nicely. That includes the rear flower already discussed that, for me, has plenty of separation from the subject thanks to the red tips of the subject and the perfect depth of field. Well done!

[annie5154]

The lighting in the first one is almost mysterious. I only wish there was more space around the subject, though I understand from an earlier post that there were other nearby flowers that apparently prevented that from happening.

The second one has exactly the opposite affect on me, as it is an extremely pleasing menagerie of color that complements the subject very nicely. That includes the rear flower already discussed that, for me, has plenty of separation from the subject thanks to the red tips of the subject and the perfect depth of field. Well done!

Thank you for your kind comments Mike.

[annie5154]

The lighting in the first one is almost mysterious. I only wish there was more space around the subject, though I understand from an earlier post that there were other nearby flowers that apparently prevented that from happening.

The second one has exactly the opposite affect on me, as it is an extremely pleasing menagerie of color that complements the subject very nicely. That includes the rear flower already discussed that, for me, has plenty of separation from the subject thanks to the red tips of the subject and the perfect depth of field. Well done!

Mike, I thought I would post the original image of #1 to let you and Donald see what I did with it, and I'm sure you will provide your thoughts

Anne

[Mike Buckley]

It's really fascinating that the second version of that image makes the subject seem less crowded to me. I can't explain why, but that composition has that psychological effect on me. Consider using a vignette or manually darkening the non-subject flowers to bring back the mysterious lighting of the subject.

Ahhhhhhhhhh. I just now realized why this version seems less crowded. That's because the subject really is less crowded in the sense that there is more space on three sides between the perimeter of the subject and the frame. I really do like this better than the first one, though both are quite nice.

[Panama Hat & Camera]

Anne,
The 3 pictures are very good! I think you did a very good job of preparing foto1 from the photo 3.
The depth of field is quite narrow and parts of the flowers were a little soft (perhaps this is one reason of them were so good).
It seems that you were using a tripod. You did not think to use f/8 to increase slightly the depth of field?
Antonio.

[annie5154]

It's really fascinating that the second version of that image makes the subject seem less crowded to me. I can't explain why, but that composition has that psychological effect on me. Consider using a vignette or manually darkening the non-subject flowers to bring back the mysterious lighting of the subject.

Ahhhhhhhhhh. I just now realized why this version seems less crowded. That's because the subject really is less crowded in the sense that there is more space on three sides between the perimeter of the subject and the frame. I really do like this better than the first one, though both are quite nice.

Thank you Mike very interesting points, and I will try the vignette.
Anne

[annie5154]

Anne,
The 3 pictures are very good! I think you did a very good job of preparing foto1 from the photo 3.
The depth of field is quite narrow and parts of the flowers were a little soft (perhaps this is one reason of them were so good).
It seems that you were using a tripod. You did not think to use f/8 to increase slightly the depth of field?
Antonio.

Hi Antonio thank you for your comments. I think the softness came from me possibly not getting the focus point right as well as the aperture, but I could have changed this from f5.6 to f8, that might have helped. Although I am happy with the look of the images, I should have taken a few with different apertures. Well remember next time

Thanks again and thanks to everyone for looking.

Anne

[annie5154]

It's really fascinating that the second version of that image makes the subject seem less crowded to me. I can't explain why, but that composition has that psychological effect on me. Consider using a vignette or manually darkening the non-subject flowers to bring back the mysterious lighting of the subject.

Ahhhhhhhhhh. I just now realized why this version seems less crowded. That's because the subject really is less crowded in the sense that there is more space on three sides between the perimeter of the subject and the frame. I really do like this better than the first one, though both are quite nice.

Hi again Mike. Image with vignette.

I quite like it actually.