Hollyhocks, different perspectives.

[Ron Evers]

1.

2.

3.

 

[vtf]

Quite nice, but as you probably would guess I'm not fond of flowers backsides unless the focus is of a bee or buterfly on it. Still good shots.

 

[Cpt.Beyond]

I like how u captured the texture of the first one. the last one kinda looks like a kaleidoscope

 

[Raizels]

Quite nice, but as you probably would guess I'm not fond of flowers backsides unless the focus is of a bee or buterfly on it. Still good shots.

I actually like pictures of flowers from the back - I posted a Passionflower as seen from the back once. I find it interesting.

The 3rd one is cool - almost 3D.

 

[...take the shot!]

Pictures like these don't really interest me but #2 is Nice. :thumbup:

 

[supraman215]

The background in #1 looks very pixelated. Could be noise? looks a little different then noise though.

is #2 HDR? I see some kind of halo around the leaf on the left.

 

[Derrel]

Absolutely lovely light in the first shot, Ron--marvelous light! I wish there was a bit more space at the top and bottom of the bloom though. THe shape and textures revelaed due to the light is outstanding. I wish the color balance were warmer though--that overall greenish look is a bit depressing.

Shot 2 is a very strong, offbeat, novel point of view. It is subtle, not in-your-face, but shot #2 has a very satisfying feeling about it. The more I look at it, the better it becomes. Again, the white balance/color cast is not 100 percent to my liking, but I think this photo is very nice. This second photo usesthe compositional style called "as in a painting", where the subject touches at least three sides of the frame, in effect filling up the entire "canvas" with subject. This is a very,very good example of that type of composition. If you cloned out the two tiny holes in the leaves, I think you'd have a little bit more harmony within the frame. You know, the more I look at these paired up, the stronger I think they both look, but #2 is a real kick-a$$ shot in my book.

Shot 3 I simply go meh to. Still, you batted .667 or whatever...enough for a heck of a MLB contract!

 

[reznap]

I love #2 as well. The contrasts between colors and the shapes are appealing. Definitely would print this out and frame it with a dark border..

#1 I agree could use more space up top and a little on bottom - great focus and sharpness though, I assume you were using a manual focusing lens. In #3 it's cool how there's a subtle star shape which fills the frame but the noise and blur hurt it a bit.

 

[Ron Evers]

Thanks for your comments guys.

No HDR just some minor contrast, sharpening & cropping in post on all three.

These were shot with a Minolta Celtic 50/3.5 macro + 2x tele-converter. I find all my Minolta lenses produce cool as opposed to warm images.

The tight cropping in #1 is to eliminate distractions nature put in the way.

Derrel, I warmed up #2 & post the original as-shot followed by the warmer version.


As-shot 5750K

Warmed up to 6500K

Personally I prefer the as-shot image.