Dandelions (there's a plethora of them in Vermont, at the moment.)

#1
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2211/...dfb73f1e_z.jpg

#2
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2028/...592a7fa1_z.jpg

#3
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3579/...707b730f_z.jpg

#4
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2753/...94d3f3e0_z.jpg

#5
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3579/...65dbe84f_z.jpg

It had just rained straight for a week and they were a little bedraggled - I wasn't going for the perfectly in focus/on black version.:)

I feel a great need for C&C - please, feel free....

Edit: drat! Something's gone wrong with the background on #3. I'll have to fix it later.

Katy,

I was going to post a semi-lazy "#3 is my favorite" but after seeing your plea for C&C, I figured I would try and help out.

Photo #1: I really like the look that the OOF dandelion heads give - they look like little glowing orbs of light. However, the near blade of grass with seedhead is a bit distracting, as is the bright spot to the upper right (looks blown and is fighting for my attention), and the purple spot in top center is distracting. I think this one really needed a slight repositioning of the composition.

Photo #2: That's some wickedly shallow DoF, and with the blown highlights (which honestly I think are ok here) on the right of the dandelion, it gives it a rather dreamy feel to it. However, the perfectly centered composition is a bit blase.

Photo #3: As I said - this one is my favorite. I don't know if you fixed the background as per your edit, but I don't see the problem with it. I think the darker background helps to really offset the brighter dandelion head. I like the half frame composition, and the macro work is perfect. Very nice shot of an otherwise overlooked subject, and gives a view most people don't get close enough to a...a...a...*achoo!*...ppreciate. (haha - sorry, I don't have allergies, so my apologies to those of you who do, but I had to make that joke).

Photo #4: This one suffers from several of the same points as #1, and here the blown out dandelion on the left looks like it has some wind blur as well. Honestly, if you don't mind the aggressive crop, I think cutting it basically in half, and taking the right side (just up to the blade of grass) would work well. You'd have to tone down the sky here again, and remove the spider web reflection to the left of the main dandelion, but I think that would work well.

Photo #5: Honestly, this is the weakest of the set. You've got a really difficult dynamic range to content with there... the dark center of the dandelion pulls in my attention and I find myself searching for something there, though I don't know what. I do see the water droplets trapped in the dandelion, but honestly, I think they get overpowered by the rest of the shot, which is a shame because I think they're supposed to be the interesting bit here.

I have to revise my original statement... now I think both #1 and #3 are my favorites. Great work capturing a subject that most of us tend to overlook or see as a nuisance (unless we're toddlers and are doing our part to spread those seeds around by blowing on them). I hope my C&C is helpful.

- Bill

Your C&C is helpful, Bill! Thank you for taking the time to give it. And, basically, we're thinking pretty much along the same lines on an awful lot of it. I've been working, since Saturday night on several of these issues. I have to do some housework and shopping so later I'll be back with a few thoughts.:)

Anyone else? I'm not saying what I'm wondering about because I'm wondering if it's okay or you'll pick up on it on your own. Thank you in advance!

btw, to clarify, the perfect dandelion on black has already been accomplished by Raylee who was on my mind when I was taking these.:) Similarly, the perfectly gorgeous shot of glowing grass was recently exhibited by Vandenberg. What's left for a girl to do???:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katy Noelle

btw, to clarify, the perfect dandelion on black has already been accomplished by Raylee who was on my mind when I was taking these.:) Similarly, the perfectly gorgeous shot of glowing grass was recently exhibited by Vandenberg. What's left for a girl to do???:rolleyes:

---

Two thoughts on this...

First, imitation is the highest form of flattery.

Second, It is impossible (ok, not 100% impossible, but very highly unlikely) that your photo would be identical to any previous example, so I see no reason why not to take similar shots. It will still have your own personal style applied to it.

I recently took a photography class where the instructor told us about a time where he (or maybe it was someone he knew - I forget now) went to iconic locations and literally was looking for tripod marks on the ground to get the same perspective and shot as some of the classic masters of the field. While my first thought was that that seemed very sad as a way to take photos, I quickly also thought of the ridiculousness of it because even if they were to find the same exact location and camera equipment and composition angle, there are outside forces at work (ie: lighting, weather, erosion, etc) that guarantee that the shot would never be the same.

So while I wouldn't recommend looking on the ground for tripod holes, I also don't think there is much risk of trying to take a similar photo as it is pretty well guaranteed to be different - maybe better, maybe worse, but definitely different.

- Bill

Hi Katy

OK..the first shot. I like this the most out of the bunch because you have good separation between the foreground and the background. You have heard me babble on about 3D composition and this shot demonstrates it very well. The lighting is subtle and your white balance is absolutely bang on. On the negative side - the sky in the top left of the frame is a no no. If you can adjust your shooting angle so that the sky is out of frame all well and good. if not clone tool is your next best friend. The problem is that when you look through the view finder the sky will not look too intrusive but when using a shallow DoF it becomes an unsightly blob:). You will have heard the term making the image pop. This is nearly there but if you open 'curves' and drag the diagonal line down slightly about a 1/4 in from the l/h axis and then go to the right hand end and drag the diagonal line up slightly you will create a shallow 'S' curve - this will make the image 'pop'. You will need to experiment but that is the general principle.

Second image - good consistent focus blur but the DoF is too shallow. Stopping down would put the whole head into focus and reduce the blown highlights on the right. I think I see what you are trying to do here with that soft look around the edges but I think you have pushed it slightly to far.

Third image - I can't really fault this but the quality of the light is not as good as the previous two images

Fourth image - hmm...the composition is a little awry here. the long blade of grass cuts the image in two and the focal point of the dandelion on the right is losing badly to the 1000 watt patch of sky in the top right of the frame

Fifth Image - underexposure creeping in again here and the inevitable noise. The subject is great but this is where a reflector would come in handy to get more light on the flower. I dont mind the sky sludge so much on this one but you needed to get more light on the front of the subject (fill light)

Katy

Don't think of taking shots with a camera. Think of controlling the light. There are a few issues with composition, as Steve pointed out, but the main problem here seems to me to be the need to control the light. I can't recall (age thing) if you have a flash-gun? That might help in situations such as this.

Thanks, very, very much, guys! I took these on Sat. after a long week of nonstop clouds and rain and the light was just making them glow. Then, I worked on processing with these for days and, like I mentioned to you, Steve, they don't even feel like they're mine.

I did, actually, take some with a higher dof but they were just ugly, bedraggled things - I liked the softer ones. Also, for a few of them, I thought of your admonitions, Rob, with the light and simply used the flash on my camera (which is "turned way down") but, then, I second doubted myself and didn't keep using it. Turns out - it was working and I wish that I'd kept going.:( I've gone back and looked in the batch of photos that I've taken from that day and where I've got one thing fixed, I've got another thing wrong. I think that I'll just take the info and run with it to the next opportunity OR come back later when I'm not absolutely sick of it all!

(Thank you, Steve, for taking the time to come and give the advice that I asked you for - I'm always helped by your admonition.:))