Small Dianthus Flower with Rain Drops

[cgipson1]

comments welcome!


Dianthus-with-Rain-Drops by CGipson Photography, on Flickr

 

[cgipson1]

Since I posted this very late last night, a morning bump!

 

[LaFoto]

The colour! WOW! So deep. So intense.
And I admire the sharpness of your photos.
Don't know what I'm doing wrong, or if my newest lens just doesn't live up to what it promised to do, but I NEVER get my photos this sharp.
Actually, I was quite disappointed when I first found out about the new lens's performance - for €900,- I had expected much more...
But a big for this photo!

 

[cgipson1]

The colour! WOW! So deep. So intense.
And I admire the sharpness of your photos.
Don't know what I'm doing wrong, or if my newest lens just doesn't live up to what it promised to do, but I NEVER get my photos this sharp.
Actually, I was quite disappointed when I first found out about the new lens's performance - for €900,- I had expected much more...
But a big for this photo!

Corinna, Thank you! This is actually a nine frame focus stack that I shot by hand.. no tripod! It wasn't easy, lol! I had to do that, since the flower was less than an inch in diameter and I used my macro lens (Nikkor 105mm Macro). Also used a diffused SB-900 flash at manual 1/2 power, as the short duration really helps with sharpness. Normally I use a focus rail and tripod for shots like this. For this, I handheld, and adjusted the focus on the lens for the different exposures. I jammed my shoulder and elbow up against a pole next to the flower pot, to help stabilize the camera also.

Here is the Exif data

File type: JPEG
File size: 13,522 KB
Creation date: 8/11/2012 07:57
Last modification: 8/11/2012 07:57
Make: NIKON CORPORATION (Nikon | Home)
Camera: NIKON D800
Lens: AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm F2.8G IF-ED
Software: Ver.1.00
Dimension: 7360 x 4912 px (36.2 MP, 3:2)
Focal length: 105 mm (equiv. 105 mm)
Aperture: F22
Exposure time: 1/250"
ISO speed rating: 200/24°
Program: Manual
Metering Mode: Spot
White Balance: Cloudy
Focus Mode: Manual
Image Stabilizer: On
Noise Reduction: Off
Flash: Unknown external iTTL flash (05 02), Flash fired, compulsory flash mode, return light not detected

 

[cgipson1]

Here is a decent shot of the flower without any focus stacking.... you can easily see the difference.

 

[MLeeK]

The color HERE is overwhelming, but that's the problem with your images! They really need to be seen in their full glory.
Amazing, Charlie!

 

[cgipson1]

The color HERE is overwhelming, but that's the problem with your images! They really need to be seen in their full glory.
Amazing, Charlie!

Thank you! I did not touch the Sat slider.. really! Those are really that color.. they are lovely flowers! I love the way the shallow DOF and focus stacking handled the background... what do you think?

 

[sleist]

Love the original shot.

The stacking in the 1st shot seems to have introduced some unpleasant distortion - particularly in the background (the grey).
Makes it look over sharpened to my eyes.

 

[cgipson1]

Love the original shot.

The stacking in the 1st shot seems to have introduced some unpleasant distortion - particularly in the background (the grey).
Makes it look over sharpened to my eyes.

Thanks! Yes.. the highlights from the raindrops, and the shallow DOF seem to have confused Zerene Stacker.. it put together an interesting background. I thought about smoothing it out.. but couldn't decide it I disliked it that much. Since I shot the stack by hand, it did introduce more variables in the stack than I normally allow... but I find it interesting.

Excluding the background, do you find the extended focus on the flower works?

 

[sovietdoc]

The shot without focus stack is clearly better.

Btw, I've heard of R2D2, never of R1C1, must be an older model.

 

[sleist]

Excluding the background, do you find the extended focus on the flower works?

I use a wide gamut monitor so I have to be careful judging reds in shot viewed online. I downloaded both shots and opened them in CS5. The red channel is clearly blown in the stacked version - less so in the non stacked. The combination of this and possible artifacts due to stacking 9 handheld images detracts significantly when compared to the 2nd (original) shot you posted. Yes, the apparent DOF is larger in the 1st shot, but I would have to say it does not help the image in this case.

 

[sovietdoc]

Excluding the background, do you find the extended focus on the flower works?

I use a wide gamut monitor so I have to be careful judging reds in shot viewed online. I downloaded both shots and opened them in CS5. The red channel is clearly blown in the stacked version - less so in the non stacked. The combination of this and possible artifacts due to stacking 9 handheld images detracts significantly when compared to the 2nd (original) shot you posted. Yes, the apparent DOF is larger in the 1st shot, but I would have to say it does not help the image in this case.

I didn't bother to write it all out, but whats exactly what I did and what I would say.

 

[480sparky41 41]

The background of the stacked shot clearly shows it was stacked.

 

[sovietdoc]

The background of the stacked shot clearly shows it was stacked.

No way, I thought it was some new kind of DoF effect

 

[RebeccaAPhotography]

Oh charlie once again I love it! Very nicely done!