Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Photo Critiques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 27, 2005, 7:39 PM   #11
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Maarten wrote:
Quote:
But knowing what the flower looks in reality I must say you overdid the "bringing out the colours" just over a tad. It's much more subtle.

Which one did you mean with my second? The flashed from above with dark background or the upright one with white background?

Maarten

Yes.. Looking at them side by side, I probably did overdo it a bit (but, you should have seen my first attempt, which had even more "pop"). I toned it down for the one I posted. ;-)

I'm certainly no expert in editing or lighting. I know what I like to see in images, but I oftendon't know the best way to get there. Hopefully, this forum will be a place that we can share techniques and ideas to improve images in a way that makes them better.

Ifound that I likedthe way thecolors appeared brighter and more saturatedin the image you included in your second post in this thread. It has a warmerglow to it that I find pleasing. I'd like to see that same warm glow in the first image (using it's composition and background).

I really didn't think about my adding too much pop (or how natural it looked), and I wasn't even trying to be creative (as Rodney suggests not being afraid to do).I guess that's because it's a flower (which seems like the type of subject that you would want to appear brighter and more saturated).

So, I was only trying to put it in a better light so to speak, to bring out the things I find pleasing about a flower --nicely saturated colors (although my edit is only a crude attempt). It falls short of having the glow from the lighting (flash above you say?) found in your second image. Again, the softwareI chose for this image was very easy to use(and it works by letting you pick renditions of an iimage you like the best, as it applies a variety of changes to it). So, I was picking what I found pleasing to my eyes (which of course, may not be what is pleasing to everyone else).

I think Tom probably says it best,that the big step isfinding a way for the true scene lighting and settings toget the image looking the way you want it to.

If there was ansimpleway to achieve the same type of impact with lighting, then it would all begin to come together (at least for my tastes) in this type of image.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2005, 1:15 AM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 50
Default

That would of course be best: getting the shot with more or less perfect lighting without having to tune up one or two of the 3056 :shock: sliding bars in PSP (or perhaps even Photogenetics). Not always easy with a reasonably good but less than perfect camera, not that much space to set up an ad interim studio etc. And not to be forgotten: a lot to learn and practice.

Will post again for sure! (let me see what I have in the archives)
Thanks for all your comments and discussion
Maarten
Maarten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2005, 7:18 AM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 50
Default

Well a final attempt (to be honest: 2) at the tulips before they start to lose their beauty. Wheather is miserable here, so not a chance of trying something differently outside. I've been attempting the artist's approach Rodney lured me into. So what did I do:
No flash, just an extra lamp from the right shining into the flower to make the flames of the flower come out and a bit of light from the top.
Pumped up saturation a bit, but not that much. Changed one background to greenish instead of the muddy brown it was in the original.
Rotated 90 degrees (looks like the extra lamp was from above now....) and mirrored.

Maarten
Attached Images
 
Maarten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2005, 7:19 AM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 50
Default

Second.
Attached Images
 
Maarten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2005, 8:34 AM   #15
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I like the colors of the flowers more from these photos, with the exception of the "hot spots" where the highlights are a bit blown in the second photo.

There is something about the way you get a nice warmglow through the translucent pedals that I find very nice in these.

I personally prefer the black background in the original photo to any of the rest for this subject (but I usually prefer darker background for most photos I look at). But, I usually see others differ with my taste in backgrounds. I guess that's what makes this kind of thing so subjective. ;-)

I find the darker green in the second photo to be more pleasing to me than the lighter background. But, I'm wondering if the background would become too much of a distraction or not -- with the focus being drawn too much towards the nice look of the background color versus the flower. I'll let others with a far better eye than mine comment.

This has got to be a tough subject to photograph!

Edit.... Looking at it more, I think thegreen works quite well with this subject (again, my taste in backgrounds often differs with others, though -- but, I like it).


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2005, 9:10 AM   #16
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

P.S. -- I know this sounds strange (as there is not a lot of difference in it). But, I still like the composition of the first image better. I have no idea why -it just seems better (butthe flower in itlacks the warm glow you're getting from some of the other images).


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:16 AM.