Some flowers from today...

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Went over to the in-law's today and captured these flowers with my little SD1000 using the FLOWER setting.
SOOC, no fiddling around on my part.

[Shadowman]

2nd and 3rd look good, first is too bland.

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Maybe this is more to your liking John...

[Dave A]

IMO the third one is the best shot. A tighter crop would improve it even more.

Dave

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Like so?

[IzzieK]

Yes, like so...I love #3.

[Ziggy]

Those are big blooms in the first two.

[DanK]

I agree--the third is the best, and the tighter crop is better. With respect to the others, I'd suggest two things that folks have suggested in the past. First, control the lighting. If you are going to do this kind of photography in full sun, like the second, you might consider buying a small handheld diffuser to soften the light--something like this. Second, worry about your background. No matter how well you do with the flower itself, a cluttered background like the one in the first will really detract. If the background is far enough away, you can blur it, but if it's too close, you have to either move the flower (the in-laws might not like that!) or put a piece of cloth or something else behind the flower.

Natural backgrounds are often such a pain that I do most of my flowers indoors, with cut flowers or houseplants.

[Manfred M]

Alan - I'm not a fan of shots of flowers that are front-lit.

I far prefer back-lit (or even side-lit) shots. That way you use the translucence of the petals and the shadows cast by the flower to produced a far more compelling image. Give it a try next time to see what that does for you.

[AlwaysOnAuto]

First off, thank you all for the suggestions, they are all welcome.
These were just some quick, grab the camera and get a picture of the flower shots while we were over at their house on another mission.
If they were in my garden, or rather my wife's garden, I might consider cutting them and bringing them inside to do a better lighting/setup etc, but they aren't so had to be left in situ.
What I wanted to show was the detail this little camera can capture. I think it's pretty remarkable considering I paid less than $20 for it, including the shipping, and it didn't even work when I got it.

And yes Jim, those blooms are pie plate sized. Really some of the biggest I've ever seen.

[DanK]

What I wanted to show was the detail this little camera can capture. I think it's pretty remarkable considering I paid less than $20 for it, including the shipping, and it didn't even work when I got it.

That explains one thing. I hadn't looked to see what camera you used. That camera has a very small sensor, roughly a crop factor of 6 relative to 'full frame', so roughly 4 relative to an APS-C 'crop sensor' camera. That explains why you have so much depth of field even at the apertures you used. One of the advantages or drawbacks of a smaller sensor--which it is depends on the use--is the greater depth of field at a given aperture. That's why you have so much detail in the backgrounds.

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Thanks for that Dan.
This is my 'Take a camera even if you don't think you'll need/use one' since it is so small yet takes pretty good pictures.

[JohnRostron]

I have to say that I preferred the first version of #1. It just look s more realistic (which tends to be my criterion). The modified version is too garish.

I always carry my Canon Powershot aboutwith me to capture a shot that I might otherwise have missed.

John

[AlwaysOnAuto]

I would have to agree with you on that John. I'm a big fan of SOOC shots myself.

I have more than one PowerShot, does that make me a collector?