Claim 3 FREE professional prints with Fujifilm
Comments
I'll leave the technical stuff to the experts, but I reckon you've done this very well! I prefer the light / colour in the version, it looks 'cleaner'. But I don't care for the composition there or the cut-off at the bottom, the flower looks as though it's toppling out of the frame.
Well done!
Moira
Well done!
Moira
It looks convincing to me as though there are lots of pokers in the background. The version does have a bit more zing in the color and contrast stakes.
There's nothing wrong in using a telephoto lens for close-up work if that's what it needs. In fact I've sometimes found it allows a better angle than getting nearer with say a 100 mm macro.
There's nothing wrong in using a telephoto lens for close-up work if that's what it needs. In fact I've sometimes found it allows a better angle than getting nearer with say a 100 mm macro.
Thanks Moira. After reading your comments I have looked up the series of shots I took of the red hot pokers and I do have one showing a lot of the supporting stalk and yes your critique is well merited. Thanks for taking time out to send me your thoughts and I appreciate the encouragement very much indeed! David
Nice work David,
Fred.
Fred.
Very well done David, the bg is nice and complimentary and you have plenty of detail in there.
I agree with the majority that the colours are better in your version but I prefer the upright flower on the original.
Spot metering is not ideal but I reckon you have got away with it here. Maybe centre weighted or Matrix ( that's on Nikon cameras, I don't know the equivalent on the Canon) either would perhaps hive you a better all round exposure on other subjects.
Love the little fly
You do need some stem at the bottom though, lots of nice texture on the flower itself is missing and you do have some spare space at the top of the frame.
Try different blending modes at different opacities, each one gives a totally different look to an image, then perhaps you can move on to using more than one texture, blending them differently at different opacities.
Opportunities are endless.
You have made a really good start here David, I am proud of you !
I agree with the majority that the colours are better in your version but I prefer the upright flower on the original.
Spot metering is not ideal but I reckon you have got away with it here. Maybe centre weighted or Matrix ( that's on Nikon cameras, I don't know the equivalent on the Canon) either would perhaps hive you a better all round exposure on other subjects.
Love the little fly
You do need some stem at the bottom though, lots of nice texture on the flower itself is missing and you do have some spare space at the top of the frame.
Try different blending modes at different opacities, each one gives a totally different look to an image, then perhaps you can move on to using more than one texture, blending them differently at different opacities.
Opportunities are endless.
You have made a really good start here David, I am proud of you !
Very nice, David.
I have to agree with others. I like the upright version (the lead image) and the processing in your version, but without the tilt.
The warm background fits the fiery nature of the plant very well. The decision is yours, of course, but I have found that a background that emulates the subject's tones can work well in many situations. When you are out and about, look out for pictures that can be used as backgrounds and keep a file of them, for future use. You can blur them and even change their hues, lightness or darkness later on. A bit of texture can be nice, but not too much.
I agree that the image would benefit from having a bit more stem showing, and it's also often a nice idea to have some foliage showing, not only to show what that flower's foliage is like, but also to add another element to your image, for added interest. See a picture of mine HERE as an example. By the way, I added that background. I use a different method when combining background with flower, but I won't go into that here, especially considering you have found a method that works for you and are doing well with it.
Pamela.
I have to agree with others. I like the upright version (the lead image) and the processing in your version, but without the tilt.
The warm background fits the fiery nature of the plant very well. The decision is yours, of course, but I have found that a background that emulates the subject's tones can work well in many situations. When you are out and about, look out for pictures that can be used as backgrounds and keep a file of them, for future use. You can blur them and even change their hues, lightness or darkness later on. A bit of texture can be nice, but not too much.
I agree that the image would benefit from having a bit more stem showing, and it's also often a nice idea to have some foliage showing, not only to show what that flower's foliage is like, but also to add another element to your image, for added interest. See a picture of mine HERE as an example. By the way, I added that background. I use a different method when combining background with flower, but I won't go into that here, especially considering you have found a method that works for you and are doing well with it.
Pamela.
Thanks Pam for your very wonderful and wise comments. I have considered all the comments made and will be uploading another Red Hot Poker next week. I have begun a folder for backgrounds. I have seen your image. It is fantastic and I have commented as such. Its encouraging to know I have had support from critiques and it looks like I have made a decent start. With much appreciation. David
I agree with many of the critiques, David. Prefer the color of the version....and I do tho k thepat hour crop is a bit too close...a little distance could ahow the drama of the red hot,poker.
Peter
Peter
beautiful
