Appears to be the same group of flowers taken under different lighting (or filter) conditions?
I really like #1! The square crop and the diffused light make all the difference here.
Vignette is a tad bit strong for me and perhaps should have been applied just a bit more selectively, though.
Kudos for posting the first columbine shots of the year!
Posted by Todd Caudle on June 29, 2010 at 11:53 PM
I really like the vignetting effect on the first one. Makes the columbines look like they're on stage.
Hi Dave, you asked for comments, so I'll be honest. While the colors seem accurate, neither of these works for me. The composition seems too cluttered, due partially to the positioning of the two furthest flowers and major merges between subject matter. The splotched brighter areas in the background, the dead flower, and the contrasty tone, add to the distraction. Are you sure the diffuser is working? I can still see sharp shadows in the subject area. The diffuser should be positioned as close as possible to the subject in order to soften the light and bring out the natural colors. Please take this as friendly criticism, as it is meant to help you improve your technique.
Cheers, Ken
Posted by Joshua Hardin on June 30, 2010 at 10:33 AM
I like #1. The vignette works for me because it puts the spotlight on the bottom columbine, exactly where the emphasis should be IMO. #2 is nice but does not have the same amount of drama and there's a lot of dead space in the upper left.
First reaction to image 1 was that it was nice looking, but appeared a bit underexposed. The focus is dead on with very nice detail of the flower. The second image was probably more accurate with the exposure and colors, but the crop and tightness with the subject in the first is more appealing. The saturation was nice, but the whites looked grey in the first is why I think it might be underexposed, but it could be the vignette. After reading Ken's comment, and looking back at #1, it did strike me that the flower was past prime with tips dry and stamen wilting. The one above the subject flower looks closer to prime. Not sure if this was what you were going after.
Discussion
11 repliesD200
Nikkor f/2.8 70-200mm@70, with Canon 500D
Tripod
Photoflex diffuser
Lr3, CS5, Nik filters
Comments Please?
I used the Color Checker Passport for the first time on this shoot and found the profiling extremely helpful.
I really like #1! The square crop and the diffused light make all the difference here.
Vignette is a tad bit strong for me and perhaps should have been applied just a bit more selectively, though.
Kudos for posting the first columbine shots of the year!
Cheers, Ken
First reaction to image 1 was that it was nice looking, but appeared a bit underexposed. The focus is dead on with very nice detail of the flower. The second image was probably more accurate with the exposure and colors, but the crop and tightness with the subject in the first is more appealing. The saturation was nice, but the whites looked grey in the first is why I think it might be underexposed, but it could be the vignette. After reading Ken's comment, and looking back at #1, it did strike me that the flower was past prime with tips dry and stamen wilting. The one above the subject flower looks closer to prime. Not sure if this was what you were going after.