Back Modifications (3)
Views 87 Unique 31 Award Shortlist   

Daffodil White Daffodil Yellow

By Squirrel  
Very much an experiment. These paper white narcissus have very thin petals and a heavy coloured frilly trumpet.

Taken in front of window with net curtain to diffuse the light and help back light but had to use a dribble of off camera flash to left of bloom. Cloned out the stem and cropped to concentrate on the flower.
Using Photoshop duplicated layer and changed blending mode to overlay. Then inverted it and applied a high pass filter. Then applied gaussian blur and merged them together. Duplicated that layer and applied oil painting filter just to bring a little texture into it.

Tags: Flowers and plants Daffodil

Save & earn with MPB; trade-in and buy pre-loved

Comments


dudler Plus
19 1.9k 1947 England
16 Apr 2017 10:50PM
My first thought is that hte centre of the bloom is a bit too heavy and dark. This seems to me to cry out for a very light, delicate, pastel treatment. Virtually no darker tones - just a couple of tiny dark areas.

That would require even softer and more even lighting, and from the front as well as the side and back.

My second question is - why the texture? Again, the inherent feel is possibly of a very fine and delicate texture, nothing more than the silky surface of the petals.

But that's only my view: if you have a reason for wanting to use a heavier treatment and look, that's fine.
banehawi Plus
18 2.7k 4314 Canada
17 Apr 2017 12:21AM
Needs more light on the centre.

The combination of back light and spot metering is almost guaranteed to underexpose the entire shot, which makes the centre even darker. And them you added a -1 exposure comp, - really should be a +1 to override the cameras decision to underexpose because of the back-light.

I loaded a brighter, softer mod; also added more space all round, its a bit tight in the frame.

Its fun to play with those textures, but I think it would work best only on a border, rather than the flower.


Regards


Willie



Squirrel 15 471 7 England
17 Apr 2017 8:03AM
Thanks for the comments I'll re shoot it.

Jacq
mrswoolybill Plus
15 3.3k 2536 United Kingdom
17 Apr 2017 9:13AM
I hope you kept a copy without the texture layer? The image is delightful, and very subtle in its toning. But for me it's about the translucence of the petals, they almost melt away in the light. The texture layer draws attention to their surface, coarsens it. That doesn't work for me.

There's a difference between water colour painting (which is part of my background... ) and texture layers. When you add water colour paint to textured paper, the texture shows through and emphasises the delicacy and transparency of the paint. When you add a texture layer to an image you reduce any effect of transparency that exists in the original.
Moira
Squirrel 15 471 7 England
17 Apr 2017 9:43AM
Hi I've uploaded the image without the oil paint filter. Ignore my comment with the mod. Slip of the fingerSad
I print some of my images onto textured art paper and I find it helpful to use the oil paint filter just to give me an idea as to how they may look.
dudler Plus
19 1.9k 1947 England
17 Apr 2017 9:58AM
Thank you for the untextured version. I put it through the Adobe Camera Raw filter to increase exposure, holding back the highlights and brightening blacks, cropped to square, adding canvas at top and bottom. Then I brightened midtones in Levels, and put it through ACR again, reducing contrast and brightening again, also making slightly less blue.

I noticed banding in the background on the left when I was part-way through this, covered up, mostly, by my cloning.

This is very much as I'd imagined the picture... Probably quite easy to get to this from the RAW file. How does it look to you?
Squirrel 15 471 7 England
17 Apr 2017 10:48AM
The banding is an interesting one. It only shows up on images where I have used the "save to web" instruction in photoshop. And it doesn't show on every image and seems to be more obvious depending on the colour.
Jestertheclown 13 8.7k 255 England
17 Apr 2017 10:54AM
That "save for web" tool is quite destructive.
The theory that images displayed on websites should only be of low resolution and merely adequate quality works a lot of the time but I fear that Photoshop sometimes takes it too far.
dudler Plus
19 1.9k 1947 England
17 Apr 2017 2:36PM
I think 'save to/for web' involves a high level of compression (it also strips out EXIF, so you probably have to put that in manually). It's fine for little images that are peripheral to the main content of a webpage, but not so good for the sort of thing we're doing at EPZ.

I'd always suggest saving at the least compression - this site now accepts full-size, high quality files, even from cameras with big sensors... No need to reduce size at all.
pamelajean Plus
16 1.7k 2263 United Kingdom
17 Apr 2017 6:45PM
You have some nice flower pictures in your portfolio, Jacqueline. Some that you have "played around with" are not to my taste, others (like the bleeding hearts) are nicely done.

Thankyou for uploading the daffodil here without the oil paint filter. I don't think the filter enhanced the flower at all. You already have a lovely soft effect on the flower which is attractive on its own.

Pamela.
dark_lord Plus
18 2.9k 824 England
17 Apr 2017 9:17PM
There're quite a few steps in that workflow, though nothing complicated or tricky, so I guess you knew what you were after at each stage.

I like the result, but the thing that kills the image for me is the dark centre. I'm coming a bit late to this, though Willie's mod is how I'd like to have seen this.
Squirrel 15 471 7 England
18 Apr 2017 9:55PM
Tried to reshoot tonight but the daff has "gone off" edges of petals browning. Yuk
Squirrel 15 471 7 England
18 Apr 2017 9:56PM
Thanks for all the comments. Will try again with different white flower.
Sooty_1 12 1.5k 221 United Kingdom
18 Apr 2017 11:14PM
As above for the points about texture and dark centre, but I'd suggest using a (large) white reflector to bounce light back into areas that require it at the taking stage. The danger is that too much manipulation can destroy the delicacy of the petals, whereas a better overall exposure will reduce the amount of processing required. For small localised dark areas, a compact mirror can serve as as well.

Nick

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.