Dahlia

[DanK]

I sat down once again with Christopher Beane's 2008 book just titled "Flower", which is a truly amazing collection. Some of his most striking images use extremely simple lighting. In one series, for example, he used only the natural light coming through an open door. So I decided to start playing with simpler lighting. I did this dahlia with a single light: a 75W halogen shining through a white umbrella.

This is new to me, so C&C even more welcome than usual.

It's a 17-shot stack, as usual using Zerene. The individual shots were f/8.0, 1/6 second. 100mm macro.

[rpcrowe]

Very lovely...

[Mike Buckley]

Stunning composition, color and quality of light! If there is any photo I've seen that might motivate me to begin focus stacking images, this would be the one.

I'm curious why you used a halogen light source, considering that it's so darned hot.

[IzzieK]

Very nice...there isn't much of the photographing style of Christopher Beane's on the internet hence my hesitation in buying that book. Since you have it, can you tell me if he shows some environment shots on how he took a certain flower? HOw did you know he only used the light coming from the door or just a window? Anyway, this is a pretty shot...placement of the shadows did make this picture for me.

[DanK]

Thanks, all.

Mike--I assume you mean physical heat, not color temperature. Halogens are actually a bit cooler than incandescent bulb in the sense that they throw off less heat per unit of light. However, they can be constructed to be very small, which concentrates the heat. I use halogen reflectors, which are a bit cooler than the old standard PAR incandescents. At some point, when I can get LEDs with a good enough color balance that will fit in my lights, I'll switch to those.

Izzie--none of his photos show the environment. However, in a few places, the book tells a bit about what he did. One set was taken at an old farmhouse, where he simply used light from the door.

Dan

[xpatUSA]

Thanks, all.

Mike--I assume you mean physical heat, not color temperature. Halogens are actually a bit cooler than incandescent bulb in the sense that they throw off less heat per unit of light.
Dan

But only in that sense (of efficiency), Dan. Unfortunately, the envelope (bulb) temperature has to be much higher, from Wiki:

"The overall bulb envelope temperature must be significantly higher than in conventional incandescent lamps for this reaction to succeed, however: it is only at temperatures of above 250 °C (482 °F) on the inside of the glass envelope that the halogen vapor can combine with the tungsten and return it to the filament rather than the tungsten becoming deposited on the glass. A 300 watt tubular halogen bulb operated at full power quickly reaches a temperature of about 540 °C (1,004 °F), while a 500 watt regular incandescent bulb operates at only 180 °C (356 °F) and a 75 watt regular incandescent at only 130 °C (266 °F).^"

As to LED lighting, I'm using 3500K PAR38 17W floods to good effect (small product photography) and their spectral emission curve is quite smooth plus the oft-quoted horrendous blue peak is not that big:

http://kronometric.org/phot/post/CiC...38%20(014).pdf

Or, their 2700K might be preferred (much less blue):

http://kronometric.org/phot/post/CiC...38%20(009).pdf
.

[Mike Buckley]

You're correct, Dan, that I was thinking of physical heat. However, I sometimes get the terminology confused. In this case, I was thinking of quartz lights, which are very hot, when you explained that you used a halogen light. Sorry about that!

[DanK]

"The overall bulb envelope temperature must be significantly higher than in conventional incandescent lamps for this reaction to succeed, however: it is only at temperatures of above 250 °C (482 °F) on the inside of the glass envelope that the halogen vapor can combine with the tungsten and return it to the filament rather than the tungsten becoming deposited on the glass. A 300 watt tubular halogen bulb operated at full power quickly reaches a temperature of about 540 °C (1,004 °F), while a 500 watt regular incandescent bulb operates at only 180 °C (356 °F) and a 75 watt regular incandescent at only 130 °C (266 °F)."

In the case of reflector bulbs, the envelope is not near the surface. So, the temperature of the interior bulb is not the issue; it's heat radiating from the larger surface. And unless I am wrong about the relative efficiency, that has to be less than in the case of the less efficient incandescent bulbs.

As to LED lighting, I'm using 3500K PAR38 17W floods to good effect (small product photography) and their spectral emission curve is quite smooth plus the oft-quoted horrendous blue peak is not that big:

I'm still shopping. One can get bulbs with CRIs higher than that, if I recall--I think I have seen at least 90--and I want to see a reasonable R9 value too. An engineer friend of mine has been experimenting with a bunch, so at some point, I will find what I want. For now, I will stick with halogen, which is easy to correct, but I do want LEDs down the road for their higher efficiency/

[Wavelength]

Beautiful.... super

[Rita]

Dan, what a beautiful image. I really like the soft effect of the petals, very nice.

[rudi]

Very nice Dan. A 'tricky' Dahlia, with easy to blow whites and reds, but you handled them very well.

[Shadowman]

Nice shot.