Macro shots of three roses

using the kit 24- 105 lens, manual on tripod with IS off:
the roses are really struggling to bloom under the cold winter temp:

#1 has some potential but #2 and #3 are too cluttered in my opinion. Also the fact that the flower(s) in focus is/are not yet "open" does not help.

Agree iwth vk2gwk on 1 and 2- but cropping will help. Not sure about 3.

Good points

Try to select a single rose, or the trio as you have again, but get CLOSER! THese are not macros.

Thanks...I labeled the shots macro because it appeared to be in focus within the "macro" label on the kit 24- 105 lens

I have the same lens, I don't see a marco label on it...??

macro \'mak-(.)ro-\ aj [macr-] 1: excessively developed : LARGE, THICK 2: of or involving large quantities 3: GROSS

Your shots do not fit the definition.

I understand now that my title is mis labelled...on the kit lens depth of field window, it says macro and on the lens ring is says macro .45 to 1.5 ft.

Sorry if this is off topic, I took a photo of the 24 to 105 L lens- here

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

I think #1 would be greatly improved by the removal of the leaf at the top right.

I think they'll be better shots when the roses open. Don't be afraid to get in tight. Tonal range looks a little constricted, as is the contrast. See histogram below. Also appears that you could drop the exposure by 1/2 stop.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

thanks....good inputs.

i would go at them once more, but this time compose the two facing down instead of side on. that may be an interesting shot.

good work!