Trilliums

[Round Tuit]

These are a couple of shots that I took yesterday of trilliums growing in a patch of violets under a mature maple tree.

#1


#2


Personally, I prefer photo #2 but I would appreciate comments on the composition of these two photos. Is the placement of the flowers in the frame appropriate?
Is the depth of field too narrow or too wide? What would you suggest to make these photos better?

Andre

[IzzieK]

The main flower/plant in #1 is too centered? I am interested in the background there. There seems to be something more to look at, at that corner that might be more interesting...hmmm...must be the colour, the orange right at the top leading to ??? somewhere there? 'Can do with a crop...so I don't notice it too much. Or am I complaining too much???

#2's position of the flower is nicer. The orangy background does not bother my eyes much here. Both shots needed a better angle to concentrate on the flowers themselves instead of the background...(Now I am wondering why that bothers me so much...weird..) Both shots needs a better angle to get rid of that background...(here I am again...) The texture of the flowers in #1 is much better than #2. As for composition, I like #2...

[JohnRostron]

I agree with Izzie. The composition of #2 is better, but the flower detail is better on #1

John

[Manfred M]

Andre what strikes me about both of these images is how bright the background (mainly the tree trunk is) when compared to your subject, the trilliums. Our eyes tend to get drawn to the brightest part of the image, and when that is not the subject, the image is not as strong as it could be.

One of the sources of this brightness is the reflection of light off the tree trunk and the leaves. I tend to always try to shoot this kind of scene with a polarizer to cut down these reflections. It might we worth a try.

The time of day is not working in your favour either; the light looks quite harsh; you'd get better image in more diffuse lighting.

[bnnrcn]

Hi Andre I agree with Manfred about the light. I would crop #1 from left to make a square frame as the left part of the frame doesn't add to the composition and distracts, also the flowers look too centered.

[Geoff F]

Exactly what I was thinking.

The foreground in #1 is a bit out of focus so there are possibly other crop size options which would need a bit of foreground reduction.

[Round Tuit]

Thank you Izzie, John, Manfred, Binnur and Geoff for your comments. It seems that everybody agrees that #2 was a better composition but that the background is too busy and too bright. I took all of your advice and retried the photo with a tighter crop to eliminate unnecessary background. I also waited until very late afternoon so that the light would be both more diffused and less bright. I think that the result is a much improved photo. I always appreciate your comment.



P.S I will invest in a polarizing filter and experiment with that as well.

Andre

[IzzieK]

Good move, Andre...you won't regret having a polarizing filter. It is one those that you will always use, not shelved. And yes, this is much better.

Thank you Izzie, John, Manfred, Binnur and Geoff for your comments. It seems that everybody agrees that #2 was a better composition but that the background is too busy and too bright. I took all of your advice and retried the photo with a tighter crop to eliminate unnecessary background. I also waited until very late afternoon so that the light would be both more diffused and less bright. I think that the result is a much improved photo. I always appreciate your comment.



P.S I will invest in a polarizing filter and experiment with that as well.

Andre

[ied]

Indeed, The color and composition is much better.

Irene

[Geoff F]

That version is fine, Andre.

My tip for further images, as proved by this shot, is don't bother with a polarizer just add some shading and get your exposure spot on; which will usually involve a bit of exposure compensation. Also a custom white balance can be useful at times.

So instead of a polarizer, which has never worked for me, have a look at a Lastolite Difflector or something similar. Simply positioning yourself to create some light shadow can help.

[Round Tuit]

Thank you Izzie, Irene and Geoff. I'm glad that you approve of the changes I made. Someday, with your help, I might become a photographer!

Geoff - I don't think that difflectors (i.e. reflectors and diffusers) and polarizing filters are interchangeable. If I remember well from my first year physics course many decades ago, light that is reflected at a shallow angle gets polarized in one specific orientation. A polarizing filter oriented in the right direction will block only that polarized light. That is how polarized sunglasses reduce glare. Polarizing filter will not soften harsh shadows but will darken that part of the photo that has a strongly polarized light.
A reflector or a diffuser on the other hand, can be used to soften harsh shadows but would not selectively darken any area of the photo. In the case of my trilliums, I waited for the right light but, in theory, I could have achieved similar results with a polarizing filter to darken the tree trunk and the green foliage and a difflector to soften the shadows.

Of course I could be completely out to lunch. If that is the case I am sure that somebody more competent than me will clarify the situation.

Andre

[bnnrcn]

Your last shot is much better Andre

[Round Tuit]

Your last shot is much better Andre

Thanks Binnur, I'm glad you like it.

Andre

[jcuknz]

It appears that I disagree with others as the main fault in #2 is that we have two items of interest and do not know which to look at ... so I return to #1 which is more integrated ... particularly if you crop as suggested earlier and use a darkening brush on the trunk ... also because the flowers are bigger in frame they stand up against the still quite bright tree trunk better.

...

[jcuknz]

Of course since my camera has a x10 zoom [280mm equivalent] I would have gone in for a tighter representative shot ... still a bit loose but because of the other flower behind .... the crop from your shot is of course rather degraded by enlargement ...edit tinypix didn't blow it up ... good

.....

[chauncey]

Andre, there are few flower images that wouldn't benefit by getting closer, then closer yet.

I've never used a polarizing filter...better to wait on proper lighting, IMHO.
Shooting and post processing white things, of any kind, is a very tricky accomplishment.

[Aeros]

Thank you Izzie, John, Manfred, Binnur and Geoff for your comments. It seems that everybody agrees that #2 was a better composition but that the background is too busy and too bright. I took all of your advice and retried the photo with a tighter crop to eliminate unnecessary background. I also waited until very late afternoon so that the light would be both more diffused and less bright. I think that the result is a much improved photo. I always appreciate your comment.



P.S I will invest in a polarizing filter and experiment with that as well.

Andre

[Manfred M]

I've never used a polarizing filter...better to wait on proper lighting,

When doing this type of photography, I use a polarizer almost 100% of the time, even in overcast conditions. The only time I'll remove mine is when I'm hand holding and the light levels are getting too low. This is a "trick" I learned from a well known local wildlife and nature photographer and it works really well.

A polarizer just gets you that "pop" in images. Other than darkening the colour of the sky, a polarizer reduces reflections from non-metallic surfaces. Suggesting that one waits "on proper lighting" doesn't work; the only time that you don't get any reflections is when there is no light, and that makes it a tad difficult to photograph things...

[Round Tuit]

It appears that I disagree with others as the main fault in #2 is that we have two items of interest and do not know which to look at ... so I return to #1 which is more integrated ... particularly if you crop as suggested earlier and use a darkening brush on the trunk ... also because the flowers are bigger in frame they stand up against the still quite bright tree trunk better.

...

John I like what you did with photo #1. I find the shadows created by the harsh light that were distracting in the original photo now seem to add a sense of depth to it.

Andre

[Round Tuit]

Of course since my camera has a x10 zoom [280mm equivalent] I would have gone in for a tighter representative shot ... still a bit loose but because of the other flower behind .... the crop from your shot is of course rather degraded by enlargement ...edit tinypix didn't blow it up ... good

.....

I agree that a close crop of one of the trilliums would make a nice photo. However it would no longer be a photo of a clump of trilliums at the foot of a maple tree. The background adds context to my original shot that I feel is important to reflect my vision.

Andre