HOME | DD
Armaiti-Zarich — Into The Blue
Published: 2014-06-09 19:02:12 +0000 UTC; Views: 538; Favourites: 33; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Originally an entry for Abstractography contest .Related content
Comments: 9
Funny - I just took and loaded onto DA almost the exact same photo today! If I had of seen yours I would not have bothered!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Why not, it's not like I have it patented or anything 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What was funny was I saw yours through UnforgettableTime. I was thinking about submitting mine to there, and when I saw yours I scratched my head trying to remember if I had already done so. I think yours is better, it has a lovely look to it, and better background.
Equipment does not matter as much as you think. Some people make a big deal out off it, but does not help them (see me!). Actually the lenses I use cost less than $50 today. The best? No. But they do what I want for now.
You on the other hand know what to do with yours. That is all that matters.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, I use a small compact camera with just 8MP resolution without replaceable lenses - it used to cost around 600 dollars once, I'm told, but that was at least a decade ago. Not exactly ideal, but I try to make do with what I have. That said, some shots don't come out exactly as I'd like because of the limited technology (such as background being way too sharp on macro shots, or colours not always matching the reality), but what can one do, really, when the finances are limited
Your shot is lovely as well, though, and much sharper
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There two sides to the sharpness issue that I struggle over when it comes to macros and flowers: 1) dirt, dust, pollen, and spider silk threads. 2) "glitter" spots - these are real and are not camera noise. Most times these do not become apparent until I process the photograph. If you look closely at my tulip both are in there (although I did remove a bigger clump of spider threads on the right side and some overly bright glitter spots). Side note - there was a really cool yellow spider on this flower who was scampering about when I was shooting it. He was skittish enough that I could not get a good picture of him, just a couple of ok ones).
Leaving them in the photograph makes the photograph look way more scientific than artful. The trade off is how much time do I spend in removing them versus showing the real world in a what I think is a pleasing way. I always end up on the reality side - not sure why (talentless?).
So your tulip, without the sharpness. captures the artful side much more. I have looked through your gallery and can see in many cases where this shows through. Your sea shells picture I had seen before, and liked the way it came out - even though I would bet you did not want it that way. "Pink lily" - beautiful
As for the technology versus the expected results. Even the most advanced technological equipment has limitations. The key is to learn those limitations and just work around them. So do not let that hold you back. You have a good eye, and do good things with what you have, keeping going!
Background - yep, an issue with my lenses as well. My tulip has an almost black background even though I shot it in full daylight. I am still figuring backgrounds out. I have been tempted to substitute back grounds like colored paper, but then again I like reality and I am not great with color selection...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I understand the glitter spots as you can see some of those if you zoom into my photo as well - I wouldn't bother with those as they're "natural" as you've said. The only "unsightly" things I would get rid of are those that somehow disturb the picture or interfere with the general impression such as lens flare, spots, or birds if they're from far away and look just like a blurred smear in the sky. That's what I usually do.
I'd like to be able to take the type of pictures where only the subject is in focus and the background is blurred to the point of becoming completely undistinguishable, making the focused part truly stand out, without, for example, the abundance of partly sharp leaves behind it. Which is impossible with my camera and trying to achieve this sort of effect in Photoshop usually results in it looking awkward.
I usually go for natural look as well, though I tweak colours and contrast in Photoshop, but usually nothing too drastic. Then again I'm just a beginner at this stuff, so I'm not very skilled in editing either and have to figure out a lot of things yet, therefore I try not to overdo it
In the end, what matters the most is that you enjoy taking pictures
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Enjoyed the conversation.
One final thought. I am not sure you will like this idea or not but hey they are only flowers for so long anyway. Pick the flower you want to photograph and then set it up a distance away from the other flowers or a background you want (to hold the flower use clothes pins). That way you can get the bokah you want. I usually only do it for the really tiny ones I photograph, but the biggest reason is that at 3:1 even a tiny wisp of a breeze will kill me. I thought about doing it with the tulip yesterday, but decided not to. Then again, today I noticed it was completely wilted anyway.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
