Red rose. I'm finding flowers trickier than bugs

[JBW]

[Stagecoach]

Brian,

I'm not sure what you are finding 'trickier' or what you feel is not right with this image? But here's what I consider you can address.

If you are going to take flower shots such as this outside one of your enemies is harsh light (as with bugs also) so consider doing them early in the morning when the sun is very low and weak. Not sure what your location is like but for me it's the only time of day when the breeze or wind is almost non existent.

The lower light level will save you getting the harshness that is seen in this one.

You will need your tripod due to the longer exposure times necessary without pushing your ISO up.

You should be framing so that there is no need to crop to get best IQ.

If exposed correctly there should little need to do any PP other than basic sharpening.

[Shadowman]

Brian,

Photographing reds and yellows for print is far trickier for prints, somewhat tricky for online viewing. If your software has soft proofing mode then you can modify any out of gamut hues. In your shot, you've maintained detail in the shadows and the highlights aren't glaring so you are off to a good start.

[JBW]

Brian,

I'm not sure what you are finding 'trickier' or what you feel is not right with this image? But here's what I consider you can address.

If you are going to take flower shots such as this outside one of your enemies is harsh light (as with bugs also) so consider doing them early in the morning when the sun is very low and weak. Not sure what your location is like but for me it's the only time of day when the breeze or wind is almost non existent.

The lower light level will save you getting the harshness that is seen in this one.

You will need your tripod due to the longer exposure times necessary without pushing your ISO up.

You should be framing so that there is no need to crop to get best IQ.

If exposed correctly there should little need to do any PP other than basic sharpening.

you are referring to near 6 in the morning. Not going to happen. I was out under clouds but as I started shooting the clouds went away. The tricky part is getting the focus and the DOF right.

[JBW]

Brian,

Photographing reds and yellows for print is far trickier for prints, somewhat tricky for online viewing. If your software has soft proofing mode then you can modify any out of gamut hues. In your shot, you've maintained detail in the shadows and the highlights aren't glaring so you are off to a good start.

I am sorting out the software

[Stagecoach]

you are referring to near 6 in the morning. Not going to happen.

But you will miss that early morning dew

I was out under clouds but as I started shooting the clouds went away..

Solution, an 18" square bamboo frame and tissue paper, grease proof cooking paper etc with handle held in one hand to soften and diffuse the light.

The tricky part is getting the focus and the DOF right.

Focus on this seems spot on and the DoF is possibly more than you need.

[JBW]

But you will miss that early morning dew




Solution, an 18" square bamboo frame and tissue paper, grease proof cooking paper etc with handle held in one hand to soften and diffuse the light.




Focus on this seems spot on and the DoF is possibly more than you need.

rainy season it's always wet.
I sometimes use an umbrella
Lately I have been using the tripod as a bipod holding anything else not possible

[Wavelength]

Beautiful!!! next time you may please brush off the dust, spider web etc......

[DanK]

Nice shot.

I agree that flowers can be tricky. One problem is that it is easy to blow out intense colors, particularly reds. It looks like you didn't do that this time, but for safety, I always have all three histograms displayed to make sure that no channel is clipping.

Re the harsh light: I occasionally use a small cheap diffuser like this. If you have the camera on a tripod, you can use a wired remote release (very cheap on eBay). Then sit near the flower rather than near the camera, and hold the diffuser in one hand and the remote release in the other.

The other problem with flowers is depth. A rose or an Iris is much deeper (front to back) than most bugs, which makes DOF an issue. There is no easy out here. You can shut the aperture way down, focus stack, or live with part of the flower out of focus.

[JBW]

Beautiful!!! next time you may please brush off the dust, spider web etc......

my old eyes didn't even see it till I put the shot on the computer. Next time I'll see how good my pp skills really are

[JBW]

Nice shot.

I agree that flowers can be tricky. One problem is that it is easy to blow out intense colors, particularly reds. It looks like you didn't do that this time, but for safety, I always have all three histograms displayed to make sure that no channel is clipping.

Re the harsh light: I occasionally use a small cheap diffuser like this. If you have the camera on a tripod, you can use a wired remote release (very cheap on eBay). Then sit near the flower rather than near the camera, and hold the diffuser in one hand and the remote release in the other.

The other problem with flowers is depth. A rose or an Iris is much deeper (front to back) than most bugs, which makes DOF an issue. There is no easy out here. You can shut the aperture way down, focus stack, or live with part of the flower out of focus.

I actually prefer a little out of focus. I do need a diffuser.

[Inkanyezi]

I am with DanK on this, and in fact, there are red pixels that are blown.
This is common when shooting red flowers, and it stems from how the light meter works. An intense red, saturated (which means absense of green and blue), will read as only a third of its actual brightness by the meter, as it does neither see any green nor blue.

Sometimes this problem is easily fixed when making the image from RAW, but when shooting jpeg, the only cure is decreasing exposure, sometimes as much as 2 EV.

There is not much clipping in red in this image, but less exposure would have made it not clip at all. It looks as it has been post-processed in the jpeg state, from jaggedness of the red channel histogram. Note that the actual tip at the right side does climb the right limit a bit, which indicates some clipping. It is only the red channel that does this.

[JBW]

I am with DanK on this, and in fact, there are red pixels that are blown.
This is common when shooting red flowers, and it stems from how the light meter works. An intense red, saturated (which means absense of green and blue), will read as only a third of its actual brightness by the meter, as it does neither see any green nor blue.

Sometimes this problem is easily fixed when making the image from RAW, but when shooting jpeg, the only cure is decreasing exposure, sometimes as much as 2 EV.

There is not much clipping in red in this image, but less exposure would have made it not clip at all. It looks as it has been post-processed in the jpeg state, from jaggedness of the red channel histogram. Note that the actual tip at the right side does climb the right limit a bit, which indicates some clipping. It is only the red channel that does this.

I shoot in raw, do the major pp in Capture 1 Sony Pro JPEG and then usually move into GIMP for the final adjustments

[JBW]

there is indeed a point where enough is enough

[Inkanyezi]

I'm a bit puzzled that some posts seem to have been removed.

I didn't intend to say anything was wrong, my scribblings in #12 are more like general discussion - referring to the trickiness of flowers, which was indicated in the first post and subject line of the thread.

Red is a bit iffy, although here well coped with. Many times however, intense reds, as poppy fields, become blown to a high degree. (Blowing a few pixels is OK, blowing them wholesale another thing.)
It is not only red that often is tricky like this, also some intense blue colours, and violet. Due to the properties of the Bayer filter, violet will also be registered by the red channel. Whenever in doubt, bracketing can be used. The very tiny bit of clipped pixels here wouldn't have taken any problematic decrease of exposure, but more likely only 1/3 EV. However, as already pointed out, those pixels aren't any problem.

[JBW]

I'm a bit puzzled that some posts seem to have been removed.

I didn't intend to say anything was wrong, my scribblings in #12 are more like general discussion - referring to the trickiness of flowers, which was indicated in the first post and subject line of the thread.

Red is a bit iffy, although here well coped with. Many times however, intense reds, as poppy fields, become blown to a high degree. (Blowing a few pixels is OK, blowing them wholesale another thing.)
It is not only red that often is tricky like this, also some intense blue colours, and violet. Due to the properties of the Bayer filter, violet will also be registered by the red channel. Whenever in doubt, bracketing can be used. The very tiny bit of clipped pixels here wouldn't have taken any problematic decrease of exposure, but more likely only 1/3 EV. However, as already pointed out, those pixels aren't any problem.

Hi Urban, my memory being what it is I wouldn't know if any were removed or not. But I DO KNOW that I didn't remove or ask the moderators to remove any posts.
Brian