Flowers from a Welsh garden #1 - Chive

[rob marshall]

I'll try to do one of these every few days over the next few weeks as there are lot's of interesting flowers coming in our garden. I am allowed out there occasionally, but I have to do my 'cutting' in secret to avoid the wrath of the Head Gardener.

Eight manually focussed shots using a 5D MkII (lovely camera!) and a Sigma 105mm macro with 21mm of extension tube added to get in closer. Stacked together in CS5 (which is just as good as Helicon in my opinion). Studio lit indoors. The flower is about 3cm across, so I had to get in quite close to fill the frame - just a slight crop.

C&C welcome

Looks better on black

[ilovelucydog]

Beautiful as always, Rob.

[rob marshall]

Beautiful as always, Rob.

Thanks, Mary. I do enjoy doing these - it's such fun.

[ilovelucydog]

Thanks, Mary. I do enjoy doing these - it's such fun.

I've browsed your sites and you have some amazing floral images. You have skill, an eye and a gift for them. I know there's a bunch I would absolutely hang on my walls. Thanks for sharing them.

[GlenM]

Lovely Rob, excellent detail.

[wilgk]

Oh how cool - this reminds me of our Clover Flowers in the Horton hears a who in the seussical musical we have coming up.

He hears a tiny town of people on this pinkish/purple clover flower.....

Actually it is a wonder i can look at it without medication - as the producer chose the flower as a background for the 58 ensemble cast members photos in the program.
We have a very talented young graphic design student 15 yrs old who 'drew' the cartoon flowers - then I had to remove all my backgrounds from the photos, feather them in oval shapes and resize them to fit the graphics.

I as will Mary - look forward to seeing more

[Donald]

Excellent image, Rob. The detail is quite superb, but it's also the lighting. Beautifully executed.

[Wirefox]

Oi, your chive is clashing with my tulips. I hope you are not wearing your cerise shoes too

Now this stacked image is far less clinical than previous shots. I think it may be the lighting but this one is far more loveable for me. beautifully subtle and shame on you for blaming the camera for your outstanding work

[rob marshall]

Now this stacked image is far less clinical than previous shots. I think it may be the lighting but this one is far more loveable for me. beautifully subtle and shame on you for blaming the camera for your outstanding work

I think that's the only problem with shooting them indoors - you lose the context, and they can look a bit clinical. But if you want to stack them you really need to get them out of the breeze, as any movement will screw up the stacking alignment.

I think you are right about the lighting. This is one of those unusual shots that looks much better than real life. The lower looks quite dull in the flesh.

[jeeperman]

Very cool Rob. I do love the detail of this shot. I have yet to try focuss stacking but you may have put it on the list.

[Katy Noelle]

This is beautiful! I never realized that there was so much detail in these. I just thought that they were a common mass in the herb garden (but, you know, pretty - glowing and pink in June.) I should have looked more closely.

I really can't wait to see what else is in your wife's garden and how you shoot it.

Also, btw, I appreciated the comments, here, too - thinking and learning.

[rob marshall]

This is beautiful! I never realized that there was so much detail in these. I just thought that they were a common mass in the herb garden (but, you know, pretty - glowing and pink in June.) I should have looked more closely.

Katy

As I said earlier, it does look better than the real thing. The light really has bought out the detail in it (more than just looking at the flower with the eye). You sometimes get this sort of effect outdoors when the sunlight is at the right angle, but indoors you usually need artificial light. Here's a shot of the set-up. Note the very expensive and sophisticated reflector on the right The black screen behind the flower is a Lastolite fold-out portrait screen - a bit of overkill for a small flower, but it works very well. The white card under the flower is a sheet of glossy white photographic paper to bounce some of the light up from the single light. It helps illuminate the underside of the flower. Simple really.

[Katy Noelle]

As I said earlier, it does look better than the real thing. The light really has bought out the detail in it (more than just looking at the flower with the eye).

Yes, but... all those glowing afternoons weeding around them with my face practically stuck in them - you would think that I'd be a bit more observant. Point is, it's a lovely photo from something that seems so humble.

The white card under the flower is a sheet of glossy white photographic paper to bounce some of the light up from the single light. It helps illuminate the underside of the flower. Simple really.

I have GOT to get me one of those! (Mine got trampled by the kids and, then, the dog.) It's a bit embarrassing but...I'd completely forgotten about bouncing light up from underneath - thanks!

[djg05478]

Neato. So what is the process? Eight manually focused shots...do you have such a shallow depth of field that you only have millimeters in focus in each shot and you need 8 of them to get the whole thing?

Debbie

[rob marshall]

Neato. So what is the process? Eight manually focused shots...do you have such a shallow depth of field that you only have millimeters in focus in each shot and you need 8 of them to get the whole thing?

Debbie

Debbie

The DOF on a macro lens is not very high at all, due mostly to the closeness of the subject. DOF is affected by distance from the subject as well as aperture. If you stood on the edge of the Grand Canyon and looked across to the cliffs/rocks across the canyon and shot it on f1/8 it would all be in focus as all objects would essentially be so far away as to be treated as 'infinity' by the camera. If you then swung the camera round, and with the same setting shot a portrait of someone next to you, parts of the person would be out of focus. In my shot I used f/8. I could have used f/22 or even higher, but that degrades the image quality, and you still get some of the subject out of focus due to the closeness of the subject.

It's worth remembering that you only need to use f/16 for landscapes when you have objects that are both near and far from you that you want all to be in focus. If that's not the case, you are better using something like f/8.

[djg05478]

Debbie

The DOF on a macro lens is not very high at all, due mostly to the closeness of the subject. DOF is affected by distance from the subject as well as aperture. If you stood on the edge of the Grand Canyon and looked across to the cliffs/rocks across the canyon and shot it on f1/8 it would all be in focus as all objects would essentially be so far away as to be treated as 'infinity' by the camera. If you then swung the camera round, and with the same setting shot a portrait of someone next to you, parts of the person would be out of focus. In my shot I used f/8. I could have used f/22 or even higher, but that degrades the image quality, and you still get some of the subject out of focus due to the closeness of the subject.

It's worth remembering that you only need to use f/16 for landscapes when you have objects that are both near and far from you that you want all to be in focus. If that's not the case, you are better using something like f/8.

Thanks Rob. Great explanation and good information. This is why its soo important to just get out and shoot...just for practice, cause I know that I have taken pictures and got different results than I would have expected and I'm pretty sure its because of the principle your addressing above....DOF is affected by distance as well as aperture. cool

[thienthu]

rob
I try to capture Flower with Natural light, i love what you have done with the studio
Thanks so much for sharing
Have a wonderful time with the flower.