Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
Thread started 17 Feb 2004 (Tuesday) 21:37
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Fading Beauty

 
Crazy ­ Canuck
Member
93 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 159
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
     
Feb 17, 2004 21:37 |  #1

Hope I got this right, this is my first attempt at showing a picture. I chose the title for obvious reasons, this rose is in its last stages. Suggestions please.


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO
(alt+p)

Paul
Canon EOS R5, 5D Mark III & 7D Mark II, Canon EF 24-105mm F4 L, Canon EF 50mm F1.8, Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II, Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 L IS II, Speed lite 420EX, Speed lite 600ex-rt, Manfrotto 190X Pro3 Tripod 496 RC2 ball head, Manfrotto 679B Mono Pod 234 RC tilt head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
52,908 posts
Gallery: 193 photos
Likes: 10101
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Feb 17, 2004 22:47 |  #2

Nice image, nice composition..

It is overexposed however.
See the white on the leaves around the base of the rose? They are bright white,. this is called "washed out" or "Blown out" highlights. There is zero color information left,. no way to repair it. When you try this next,. especially with strong lighting, try to bracket the exposure.

I am also concerned that it is not as sharp as it could be. Was this hand held?

When shooting so close where details wil be evident.. it is important to keep the camera form moving at all.. thus a tripod will work wonders..

Nice job. :)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dawg
Member
76 posts
Joined Feb 2004
     
Feb 17, 2004 22:59 |  #3

As said above, correct for washout and maybe use a smaller aperature to get a little more depth of field. It would help if some of the green was in focus.

Keep posting
Dawg :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ecobo
Senior Member
Avatar
580 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Bulgaria
     
Feb 18, 2004 07:49 |  #4

It would be nice if the light was much more softer. And yet it's a good photo.


My Web site (external link) | My FB Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Warman
Senior Member
363 posts
Joined Aug 2003
     
Feb 18, 2004 10:26 |  #5

Dawg wrote:
As said above, correct for washout and maybe use a smaller aperature to get a little more depth of field.

I would have to disagree with that, i think the DOF is good and i would even like less if possible. The reason why i believe, you would like more DOF is because forms can clearly be seen in the background which are distracting and because of that you would like them sharper, they bother you being so identifiable but at the same time so blurred. That is however, closely tied with the overuse of light. If this would have been shot with the correct light, you would view the DOF as perfect with the background looking very undistracting. Just mho. :)


http://warman.lusiarte​.net/gallery LusiARTE - My gallery
http://bawarman.devian​tart.com/store - My storefront in DA
http://www.shutterstock.com/g​allery.mhtml?id=2230&r​id=2230 (external link) - Check out My Gallery Here too

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dawg
Member
76 posts
Joined Feb 2004
     
Feb 18, 2004 12:25 |  #6

Warman wrote:
Dawg wrote:
As said above, correct for washout and maybe use a smaller aperature to get a little more depth of field.

I would have to disagree with that, i think the DOF is good and i would even like less if possible. The reason why i believe, you would like more DOF is because forms can clearly be seen in the background which are distracting and because of that you would like them sharper, they bother you being so identifiable but at the same time so blurred. That is however, closely tied with the overuse of light. If this would have been shot with the correct light, you would view the DOF as perfect with the background looking very undistracting. Just mho. :)

The focus I am looking for is the bud base and the stem the rose sits on. I don't have any problem with the blurred background (maybe more blur as you said).

BTW Thanks for your opinion, I always appreciate the challenge it makes me look again and will help me improve.

Dawg :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Crazy ­ Canuck
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
93 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 159
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
     
Feb 18, 2004 16:03 |  #7

Could I get a suggestion on what type of equipment you would use and the settings. Being a real newbie I just used my camera as it came with the flash and all. I have a digital rebel, 18-55 stock lense and the built in flash. Thanks for the comments so far, glad I found this forum.


Paul
Canon EOS R5, 5D Mark III & 7D Mark II, Canon EF 24-105mm F4 L, Canon EF 50mm F1.8, Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II, Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 L IS II, Speed lite 420EX, Speed lite 600ex-rt, Manfrotto 190X Pro3 Tripod 496 RC2 ball head, Manfrotto 679B Mono Pod 234 RC tilt head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kell
Member
51 posts
Joined Feb 2004
     
Feb 18, 2004 16:50 |  #8

Well, if shooting so close, you could try using no flash at all, and increase the exposure time if it needs be. Even if the shot turns out too dark, the colour data will still be there, and you'll be able to brighten it in post-processing.
Had the shot been taken at lower lighting, I believe it'd all fit in better. :) As it is, the white leaves are a bit distracting, and I'd bet they weren't really white. ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Crazy ­ Canuck
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
93 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 159
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
     
Feb 18, 2004 18:57 |  #9

OK, this picture has a overhead light on with no flash and set on Av mode. The flower is wilting even more now. :(

http://www3.sympatico.​ca/pselvey/rose2.jpg (external link)


Paul
Canon EOS R5, 5D Mark III & 7D Mark II, Canon EF 24-105mm F4 L, Canon EF 50mm F1.8, Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II, Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 L IS II, Speed lite 420EX, Speed lite 600ex-rt, Manfrotto 190X Pro3 Tripod 496 RC2 ball head, Manfrotto 679B Mono Pod 234 RC tilt head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
52,908 posts
Gallery: 193 photos
Likes: 10101
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Feb 18, 2004 20:59 |  #10

This is a technical improvement.

Buy not using the flash you gained two things...

1. Much better exposure,. nothing blown out. Not too dark.

2. By using available light you got a longer shutter speed which reulted in deeper more saturated color.

Two lessons in one.

Now work on your composition and subject.. :)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

2,601 views & 0 likes for this thread, 6 members have posted to it.
Fading Beauty
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is griggt
1327 guests, 118 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.