A simple flower

[Stagecoach]

With bugs and boat fleets in the past week being my main work here's a conventional flower.

Dedicated to Izzie for making us all laugh.

1/20s, f/13, ISO200, 105mm macro



Grahame

[deetheturk]

Very nice Grahame,is it stacked? or is the meta-data just for a single exposure?

David

[bnnrcn]

Beautiful

[emmerick]

love it! a flower is a flower is a flower!

[Gigi71]

I love all the green and pink/orange shades, especially in this combination!

[Kaye Leggett]

Beautiful - love the colours and the water droplets.

[IzzieK]

OK Grahame...this is cute...very sharp and nice...

Thank you.

[Stagecoach]

David, Binnur, Erick, Brigitte, Kaye & Isabel

Thanks for the comments guys.

This is not stacked David just the single shot taken on a tripod with timed release. I have been trying to take some closer more interesting shots of these Frangipanis without much success so thought I would simply catch the early morning dew and light on this one.

They are quite a waxy flower that does not help.

Grahame

[chauncey]

Grahame...a simple flower ranks right up there, IMHO, with gorgeous legs. Quite nice!

[Mike Buckley]

a conventional flower

Maybe a conventional flower (I have no idea) but not a conventional photo. Stunning in every way!

[KenW]

Very nice color Simple but elegant, Not to be picky do you think it could do without the little web attached just my little opinion

[Stagecoach]

Grahame...a simple flower ranks right up there, IMHO, with gorgeous legs. Quite nice!

Thank you Chauncey, I had not thought of the stems as legs

[Stagecoach]

Maybe a conventional flower (I have no idea) but not a conventional photo. Stunning in every way!

Mike, I'm honoured by your comment.

I find it curious that you say it's not a conventional photo because in my view I see it as one although I am very pleased with the way it turned out.

Since joining CiC I have learnt so much from the threads here and people such as yourself who have given so much advice and guidance that this knowledge is now starting to become second nature when taking an image, generally whatever the subject.

Perhaps the use of the word 'conventional' by me was more to do with the fact that it was a full flower shot rather than my more usual close ups of just parts but it was also shot using the 'conventional' way that I now view a subject and shoot it when time allows.

For this shot a tripod was used as needed to achieve max sharpness due to the low speed with available lighting. I took time to assess the direction of lighting and the background I would achieve from the shooting angle. I took time to determine the exact point of maximum sharpness I wanted and very carefully manually focussed on that point. I took time to take test exposures and determined using the histogram and blinkies that I had what I wanted and lastly took the time to take a number at different apertures knowing these would affect the background significantly.

Nothing unusual in any of the above but I have learnt that if you follow this conventional process you have an image that you do not have to spend any time correcting in PP but one that gives you the easiest and greatest scope to alter if you wish to.

All learnt from CiC

Grahame

[Stagecoach]

Very nice color Simple but elegant, Not to be picky do you think it could do without the little web attached just my little opinion

Thanks Ken, I had considered the small string of web but could not make my mind up, I wish I had spotted it when taking the picture I may have been able to mist spray some water on it to make it look like the dew on the flower

[Mike Buckley]

I took time to assess the direction of lighting and the background I would achieve from the shooting angle. I took time to determine the exact point of maximum sharpness I wanted and very carefully manually focussed on that point. I took time to take test exposures and determined using the histogram and blinkies that I had what I wanted and lastly took the time to take a number at different apertures knowing these would affect the background significantly.

My thinking is that your thought process is far from conventional. Not unheard of but certainly not typical (conventional). Thanks for doing such an excellent job of making my point for me.

And by the way, your results are also far from conventional. That's no surprise now that I understand the details of your approach.

[Brownbear]

Exquisite!

[ClaudioG]

Grahame, my friend, that is absolutely amazing, i've been wondering about doing some flower photography now that we are slowly going into winter here in South Africa. For me, only an image of a flower that makes you wish you could touch it is worthy in this genre, and yours is one of those and has inspired me to dedicate winter to this genre.(Not that "winter" is much of a winter here.)

May i ask..do you feel your frame has benefited your image? I feel it has, but i'd like to know (if you think it does) why does it benefit it?

Btw, a flower without a web is not a flower sorry Ken

[IzzieK]

Thank you Chauncey, I had not thought of the stems as legs

Aw come on, Grahame, anything long and skinny to William can be referred to as "legs"... You should know better...

Good comment William!

[Bobobird]

Beautiful...

[Stagecoach]

Exquisite!

Thanks Christina

Grahame