Droplet

[chauncey]

This is one of my new ones...I'm wondering if I'm too close and not including enough of the upper portion.


.

[Downrigger]

I'm wondering if I'm too close and not including enough of the upper portion.

I think so, but quite brilliant, nonetheless.

[deetheturk]

Good image,but i think you are right,personally i would like to see a bit more of the top,what has caused the marks top right and left of the image?

[bnnrcn]

I agree with Mark and David

[Brownbear]

Beautiful and brilliant.. Yes, I would like to see more of the droplet.

[mknittle]

All of the above

[Shadowman]

Very nice, I'd like to see another version but I don't think it will draw focus away from what we have here.

[chauncey]

It's about time that I fessed-up...with this image I cheated. More than I generally do.
I pulled up one of my older flower images that was somewhat inadequate to start with, and then placed the droplet in front of my monitor and took the shot. Wanted to see if the technique would work before buying an orchid.

[IzzieK]

William C. Boyer! You did not!!!! Now go to the bathroom and wash your mouth with soap for cheating...

[James G]

Not sure you cheated... you wanted to try the technique, improvised a test, then asked for an opinion on the result. Seems all right to me, no claims made about the nature of the image behind the droplet...

OK now the real challenge....
The image behind the droplet is two dimensional, but you propose to do something similar with a three dimensional flower. I would expect that to result in some differences, as a result of the bullseye effect of the droplet.

Not sure what the final effect would be, but I suspect it will result in more image clarity and pop if your lighting is correct.

Maybe the attached image will illustrate what I'm getting at....



I was interested in the raindrops themselves and not so much the images within the droplets. The image through the rain drop is about 2 feet through to 'infinity' so I guess you should be able to get the image your want.

The image below is a bit more like what you are trying to do and you can see the leaf behind the drop is 'fully in the frame' even though it is only a few cm away and much larger than the raindrop. Droplet clarity is good but internal focus is poor, but to be fair I was not specifically photographing the image in the drop



You have me intrigued now!

[chauncey]

I don't know the physics involved but...I would submit that if one took a normal detailed/photo-stacked flower droplet image and compared it to the droplet monitor image. one would be hard pressed to discern the difference. Think I'll give it a shot...major league, bad pun, groan.

[James G]

Oddly enough I was thinking about stacked shooting (of the actual flower), to resolve depth of field issues, but can't quite get my head around the concept where/how the image is being modified by the water droplet.

Some things are too complicated to think through without resort to, as you nearly said ..." giving it a try".

[Stagecoach]

Looking forward to seeing the progress on this. I would suggest one of the main factors as so ably shown by James in that first image is to get all of the drop sharp within the DoF.

From previous interest in these refractions it appears the monitor screen is a useful tool for providing the background colour and bokek when the shots are staged.

Grahame