[SI] The Dave©'s flower comments

The Dave©'s comments:

Not picking on anybody, but offering honest thoughts even though they
may come off as harsh to some.

Tully Albrecht: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992453
I also thought this was an asparagus at first glance. For me, the
lighting and colors, and even background, do nothing for me. It makes
me think pastel-fake, to make up a phrase. I think a shallower depth
of field to blur the background would help. Plus, probably a different
color background, if possible, to contrast and set the plant out more.
As such, it all blends together a bit too much.

Michelo: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992455
This one is my favorite of the group. Detail, light, shadows, etc.
The noise actually enhances it, IMHO, and gives a 'feel' or 'mood' all
it's own.

Mike Benveniste: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992456
I love the concept behind this, and almost wish I had thought of it.
You mention the flowers didn't hold up well in the freezing, which is
unfortunate. For me, I think it would have worked better if the ice
weren't so cloudy. I love the contrast of blue with a splash of yellow
against the stark coldness of the ice. The contrast is more than just
color, and a great concept. I might even try it myself someday.

The Dave© (mine): http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992458
I like it. What else am I supposed to say? :-)

Paul Campbell: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992459
Sunflowers in black-and-white instead of color. I like that you "broke
the rules", would like it better if the focus and contrast were better.
This one, I think, would benefit from a deeper depth of field and more
detail at least in the center of the larger flower.

Jim Kramer: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992460
Loved the thumbnail. Viewed the full-size, and... eh. I've been
thinking lately about trying something with fake flowers myself, maybe
to catch the texture or something.

Douglas Macdonald: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91999146
A picture of a picture. Eh. I actually like the border treatment,
though, and the flowers themselves. The light on the leaves in the
background is too harsh, and distracts a bit.

Paul Furman: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/92002759
A little more depth would help, but otherwise I like it. I'm not quite
sure if I should be looking at the blue flower or the green bud.

Troy Piggins: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/92042664
The flower itself needs to be sharper, though I'm sure that would have
forced a longer exposure resulting in the bee's wings being blurred.
Still, a necessary trade-off, I think. Then again, maybe the entire
bee would have been blurred, at which point there's a choice to be
made. Instead of 1/250s @ f11 @ ISO400, maybe 1/250s @ f16 @ ISO800,
or something similar. Any potential extra noise from the ISO800 would
have been acceptable for this shot, IMHO.

On Jan 25, 5:48 pm, The Dave(c) wrote:
The Dave(c)'s comments:

Not picking on anybody, but offering honest thoughts even though they
may come off as harsh to some.

Jim Kramer:http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992460
Loved the thumbnail. Viewed the full-size, and... eh. I've been
thinking lately about trying something with fake flowers myself, maybe
to catch the texture or something.

Oh... the brutality. :-)

I actually intended to grab some real flowers the day before, but got
distracted and didn't. Then I didn't feel like spending the money on
the gas to go and get some flowers. Oh well, I shall continue to work
on my horrible photography and try to improve on lack of compositional
skills, but being such a lazy sloth; I wouldn't expect to see any
improvement anytime soon. :-)

I actually like the IR highlights on the fabric of the flowers, and
shooting in IR and B&W covered up the dust nicely. :-) Can't wait for
late spring to try it on a real rose.

Thanks for commenting.

JimKramer wrote:
On Jan 25, 5:48 pm, The Dave(c) wrote:
The Dave(c)'s comments:

Not picking on anybody, but offering honest thoughts even though
they may come off as harsh to some.

Jim Kramer:http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992460
Loved the thumbnail. Viewed the full-size, and... eh. I've been
thinking lately about trying something with fake flowers myself,
maybe to catch the texture or something.

Oh... the brutality. :-)

I actually intended to grab some real flowers the day before, but got
distracted and didn't. Then I didn't feel like spending the money on
the gas to go and get some flowers. Oh well, I shall continue to work
on my horrible photography and try to improve on lack of compositional
skills, but being such a lazy sloth; I wouldn't expect to see any
improvement anytime soon. :-)

I actually like the IR highlights on the fabric of the flowers, and
shooting in IR and B&W covered up the dust nicely. :-) Can't wait for
late spring to try it on a real rose.

Thanks for commenting.

Thank you for not taking unnecessary offense.

Anyway, truth be told, except for some of the stuff Brett has posted
here, I've never been a huge fan of IR photography, so I'm probably
biased even before I see it. It is intriging, in a way, I will say
that. Then again, if I understand correctly, Brett does some
manipulation with skies and the such that they're not true IR... which
seems to defeat the purpose, although they can look quite good.

Oh, and on the subject of lazy slothfulness... if I had a nickel for
every time I bought flowers specifically to photographs, then let them
die without ever taking a shot... well, you get the idea. LOL!

The Dave© wrote:

Paul Furman: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/92002759
A little more depth would help, but otherwise I like it. I'm not quite
sure if I should be looking at the blue flower or the green bud.

Thanks for commenting.
I was already at ISO 800, plus the background would have become
distracting. I could have brought a tripod & fiddled with positions more
:-) It's a little bit awkward composition, or just not that striking but
it shows the plant, leaf & flower with a pleasant background. That's
what I do at work with the camera, plant portraits for an online
catalog: http://www.baynatives.com

On Jan 25, 6:39*pm, The Dave© wrote:
JimKramer wrote:
On Jan 25, 5:48 pm, The Dave(c) wrote:
The Dave(c)'s comments:

Not picking on anybody, but offering honest thoughts even though
they may come off as harsh to some.

Jim Kramer:http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992460
Loved the thumbnail. *Viewed the full-size, and... eh. *I've been
thinking lately about trying something with fake flowers myself,
maybe to catch the texture or something.

Oh... the brutality. :-)

I actually intended to grab some real flowers the day before, but got
distracted and didn't. *Then I didn't feel like spending the money on
the gas to go and get some flowers. *Oh well, I shall continue to work
on my horrible photography and try to improve on lack of compositional
skills, but being such a lazy sloth; I wouldn't expect to see any
improvement anytime soon. :-)

I actually like the IR highlights on the fabric of the flowers, and
shooting in IR and B&W covered up the dust nicely. :-) Can't wait for
late spring to try it on a real rose.

Thanks for commenting.

Thank you for not taking unnecessary offense.

Anyway, truth be told, except for some of the stuff Brett has posted
here, I've never been a huge fan of IR photography, so I'm probably
biased even before I see it. *It is intriging, in a way, I will say
that. *Then again, if I understand correctly, Brett does some
manipulation with skies and the such that they're not true IR... which
seems to defeat the purpose, although they can look quite good.

Oh, and on the subject of lazy slothfulness... if I had a nickel for
every time I bought flowers specifically to photographs, then let them
die without ever taking a shot... well, you get the idea. *LOL!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I like good IR photography; problem is there is little of it out
there. I don't like the false color sky. IR should be B&W.

Have a look at
http://www.drookerphotography.com/
Sorry it is all Flash. But look at the American Ruins section under
his portfolio. That, I like.

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:48:16 GMT, The Dave© wrote:

Mike Benveniste: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992456
I love the concept behind this, and almost wish I had thought of it.
You mention the flowers didn't hold up well in the freezing, which is
unfortunate. For me, I think it would have worked better if the ice
weren't so cloudy.

Thanks for the kind words. I used bottled water in hopes of
keeping it clearer, but I guess I should have boiled it first.

--
Michael Benveniste --
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.

On Jan 26, 2:50 pm, Michael Benveniste
wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:48:16 GMT, The Dave© wrote:
For me, I think it would have worked better if the ice
weren't so cloudy.

Thanks for the kind words. I used bottled water in hopes of
keeping it clearer, but I guess I should have boiled it first.
--
Michael Benveniste

Bottled as in 'spring' water? Not a good choice - you want stuff
without dissolved solids/gases. Use distilled or R-O water and boil
it, then you should get better results.

wrote:
On Jan 26, 2:50 pm, Michael Benveniste
wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:48:16 GMT, The Dave© wrote:
For me, I think it would have worked better if the ice
weren't so cloudy.

Thanks for the kind words. I used bottled water in hopes of
keeping it clearer, but I guess I should have boiled it first.
--
Michael Benveniste

Bottled as in 'spring' water? Not a good choice - you want stuff
without dissolved solids/gases. Use distilled or R-O water and boil
it, then you should get better results.

That's good info, and confirms some of my unrelated experience. I have
an RO system for drinking water in my home, and it's also connected to
the ice maker. Quite often, but not always, the ice cubes come out
very clear.

* The Dave© is quoted & my replies are inline below :
The Dave©'s comments:

Not picking on anybody, but offering honest thoughts even though they
may come off as harsh to some.

Appreciate you comments, however they come off

Tully Albrecht: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992453
I also thought this was an asparagus at first glance. For me, the
lighting and colors, and even background, do nothing for me. It makes
me think pastel-fake, to make up a phrase. I think a shallower depth
of field to blur the background would help. Plus, probably a different
color background, if possible, to contrast and set the plant out more.
As such, it all blends together a bit too much.

The lighting looked a bit harsh to me. It's dead centre and the
tip is just out of frame. Unusual flower/plant, but maybe
different composition might be interesting?

Michelo: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992455
This one is my favorite of the group. Detail, light, shadows, etc.
The noise actually enhances it, IMHO, and gives a 'feel' or 'mood' all
it's own.

I liked this one too. For similar reasons.

Mike Benveniste: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992456
I love the concept behind this, and almost wish I had thought of it.
You mention the flowers didn't hold up well in the freezing, which is
unfortunate. For me, I think it would have worked better if the ice
weren't so cloudy. I love the contrast of blue with a splash of yellow
against the stark coldness of the ice. The contrast is more than just
color, and a great concept. I might even try it myself someday.

It's a shame the idea didn't pay off completely. Suppose it's
all about trial and error...

The Dave© (mine): http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992458
I like it. What else am I supposed to say? :-)

I like it too. It does miss something, but not sure what. I'm
too new to photography and composition to put my finger on it.

Paul Campbell: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992459
Sunflowers in black-and-white instead of color. I like that you "broke
the rules", would like it better if the focus and contrast were better.
This one, I think, would benefit from a deeper depth of field and more
detail at least in the center of the larger flower.

I like the composition of this one, and the different B&W
treatment.

Jim Kramer: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91992460
Loved the thumbnail. Viewed the full-size, and... eh. I've been
thinking lately about trying something with fake flowers myself, maybe
to catch the texture or something.

The thumbnail is deceptive, isn't it

Douglas Macdonald: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/91999146
A picture of a picture. Eh. I actually like the border treatment,
though, and the flowers themselves. The light on the leaves in the
background is too harsh, and distracts a bit.

I'm not sure about the border treatment. Agree about the light
on the leaves. For a commercial picture, I would have expected
the flowers themselves to be pristine - they seem to have some
brown edges and a little wilty?

Paul Furman: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/92002759
A little more depth would help, but otherwise I like it. I'm not quite
sure if I should be looking at the blue flower or the green bud.

Don't mind this one either, but all the noise is distracting.

Troy Piggins: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/92042664
The flower itself needs to be sharper, though I'm sure that would have
forced a longer exposure resulting in the bee's wings being blurred.
Still, a necessary trade-off, I think. Then again, maybe the entire
bee would have been blurred, at which point there's a choice to be
made. Instead of 1/250s @ f11 @ ISO400, maybe 1/250s @ f16 @ ISO800,
or something similar. Any potential extra noise from the ISO800 would
have been acceptable for this shot, IMHO.

Thanks for commenting. Personally I was pretty happy with this
shot. I know it's not just flowers, but as I understand the
Shoot-In rulz, it's open to interpretation. To me the photo
tells a story - the hoverfly and the flower, the spider and the
hoverfly. Don't know if you've ever shot macro or something like
a bee or hoverfly in flight, but getting just them in focus is
tricky, let alone the spider as well. There was a lot of luck
here getting both spider and hf in same focal plane. I was
actually photographing the hf and flowers just practising when I
noticed the spider in corner of frame. Reckon I had 3 seconds
max to compose, focus and get the shot before the hf flew off.
It's one my favourite photos I've taken.

Thanks again.

--
Troy Piggins
Please feel free to provide constructive criticism on any photos I post. I'm
always learning and appreciate feedback.

On Jan 27, 3:19 am, The Dave© wrote:
wrote:
On Jan 26, 2:50 pm, Michael Benveniste
wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:48:16 GMT, The Dave© wrote:
For me, I think it would have worked better if the ice
weren't so cloudy.

Thanks for the kind words. I used bottled water in hopes of
keeping it clearer, but I guess I should have boiled it first.
--
Michael Benveniste

Bottled as in 'spring' water? Not a good choice - you want stuff
without dissolved solids/gases. Use distilled or R-O water and boil
it, then you should get better results.

That's good info, and confirms some of my unrelated experience. I have
an RO system for drinking water in my home, and it's also connected to
the ice maker. Quite often, but not always, the ice cubes come out
very clear.

Yep, it's a black art! The key is slow freezing, along with no
impurities or dissolved gases. Problem is, some gases will dissolve
back into water even as it is sitting in the freezer, so it is very
difficult to get consistent results with ice cubes/uncovered
containers. And of course if you completely fill and seal a bottle
(unless it is expandable/flexible) it will probably not survive as the
water expands to become ice... (O;