More Ragged Beauty C&C

[greybeard68 40]

ragged beauty by GREYBEARD12, on Flickr #1
#2
single-3 by GREYBEARD12, on Flickr
50mm f/1.8 @ f/4 iso 100

No fake blur today, this old cheapo Chinese Nikkor rocks.

 

[PixelRabbit]

Very pretty

I wish there was more light, there is tease of it in the full flower top right. I've been trying to get good shots of white daffodils (I'm getting close lol) and I've found that white flowers flatten out very quickly in harsh light or in shade, early morning/late day have worked the best. Get the light to hit them just right and you get so much subtle detail, it makes a huge difference.

 

[Joel_W]

Picture 1 is under exposed as the whites just aren't there. Picture is exposed correctly, as you can see the differences in the whites. DOF is a little too shallow, as the lower petals are out of focus. I would have much preferred to have the whole flower in focus.

I still struggle with Whites and Yellows, so you're not alone.

 

[fokker]

Underexposed can be a subjective term. To me the exposure on #1 looks perfect and I wouldn't change it.

 

[Joel_W]

Underexposed can be a subjective term. To me the exposure on #1 looks perfect and I wouldn't change it.

In this case the whites aren't white. So I term that as under exposed.

 

[shootermcgavin]

I don't know how you can possibly think 1 is exposed properly, not much to do with subjective on that one.

 

[greybeard68 40]

Underexposed can be a subjective term. To me the exposure on #1 looks perfect and I wouldn't change it.

I think that this is more of what Joel and Shooter have in mind........

CLUSTER-2 by GREYBEARD12, on Flickr

High Keyed

 

[Joel_W]

Exactly. Nice edit. The whites now pop, and aren't dull and drab.