P. haynaldianum, new and final photo effort

[masaccio]

I get that natural light would be the best of all possible worlds. I'm just in short supply of it. On the other hand, the critical observations are taking me forward, and that's a GOOD thing. Not a bad way to spend a couple of hours, trying to capture the beauty of one of these guys.


!

 

[DrLeslieEe]

I just love the carriage of the flowers. Just magnificent.

Colors still off as the purple of this species is violet, not pink red as in pics.

Still, nice try though.

 

[masaccio]

Thanks for the comment. I do have to disagree with you, I'm afraid. I'm looking at the photos and I'm looking at the actual flowers. I'd have to say, absolutely dead on to 99%, for the sake of argument.

 

[DrLeslieEe]

I completely agree with you that the flower colors are dead on with the pics under halogen lights.

 

[DrLeslieEe]

But under natural light, this is not the true color as I’ve judged these plants over 6 years now lol.

 

[masaccio]

Damn. I agree.

 

[Ozpaph]

You could 'colour correct' the photo without 'natural light'.

 

[masaccio]

I could. I've already done a lot of that, both in the camera an in post-processing. It's difficult to substantially adjust the color selected parts of a photo without making other things obviously inaccurate and/or unappealing. One example that comes to mind is when blue cattleyas were first making their debut. One could tell that the vendor photos had been manipulated to bring out the blue tone. They looked so fake that the honesty of the photo came into question, in my opinion.
I actually have one more idea just for fun. I happen to have on hand some 4700-5300K 60 watt spots that I can try mixing in with the 120 watt 3000K spots. That should help with the blue tones. It would be great to get a workable combo so I could use it for other things.

 

[masaccio]

This is yesterday's attempt. I don't really see much difference in the shade of the petals. Nice, though.

 

[Happypaphy7]

I actually didn't mind the photo from the earlier thread. It looked like it was shot in the sunset. I liked it. and the flower colors looked more intense in that shot.

The photos here, I prefer the first sets. The second one looks a bit too touched.

 

[DrLeslieEe]

This is yesterday's attempt. I don't really see much difference in the shade of the petals. Nice, though. View attachment 23814

Nice photos.

Colors look more realistic now for all except the white reflection (a bit overexposed). But a really nice attempt.

 

[masaccio]

I actually didn't mind the photo from the earlier thread. It looked like it was shot in the sunset. I liked it. and the flower colors looked more intense in that shot.

The photos here, I prefer the first sets. The second one looks a bit too touched.

All true and thanks for the kind comments. I realized I was pushing the envelope with this last batch. I published it because the background color actually is close to the actual color of the wall. So light color balancing will be a worthwhile continuing exercise for me.
There comes a point, though, when you have to ask yourself about your personal goal. Photography is seldom an exercise to exactly reproduce the subject. It's about reproducing the character of the subject. I think that goal was accomplished long ago.

 

[kitfox]

As a portfolio photographer, I disagree with my artsier brethren. A photograph has to represent its subject as faithfully as possible. However, I find all the photos you took to be very beautiful! What are you using as a camera?

 

[masaccio]

Thank you. Nature did most of the work for me. The camera is a Canon EOS 5D. As you may know, it's Canon's mainstay "Prosumer" full-frame model, but an older version. I haven't updated in a few years. Lens is the Canon 100-400 IS II. Thanks for the comment.
By the way, I'd like to observe that a "faithful" representation of a photographic subject is not necessarily constrained to being a mug shot. Reality is subjective and highly dependent on what the photographer sees when he looks at his subject. So while I could accept your saying that you prefer a photograph to conform to certain strictures, I object to the statement that a photograph "should" be anything. Thanks.

 

[kitfox]

Do you have a compatible off-camera flash? The chips canon uses are pretty accurate color-renderers with the spectrum a good flash throws.

oh, and nature vs. nurture? I think there is a lot of nurture showing through!

 

[kitfox]

Sorry, I replied before i saw your edit...did not mean to offend, I meant in my world of photography, I am expected to capture an image that represents what the eye would see. More science than art. But I did not mean to cast the net wide enough to force my opinion on anyone...

 

[Ozpaph]

nicer, thanks

 

[DrLeslieEe]

I think there are two kinds of flower photos:

1. botanical = realism of flowers and colors are essential for subject evaluation in judging and objective scientific scrutiny

2. artistic = where the photographer/artist uses their subjective perspective to present and manipulate the flower in an artistic version of flower to reflect other viewpoints of the object.

Both are totally acceptable! But depending on who’s looking and analyzing in their respective context, the picture has to reflect that.

I accept the beauty of the initial photos. But in order for me to assess the truth of the colors, I appreciate the realism of the last photo.

 

[masaccio]

Sorry, I replied before i saw your edit...did not mean to offend, I meant in my world of photography, I am expected to capture an image that represents what the eye would see. More science than art. But I did not mean to cast the net wide enough to force my opinion on anyone...

And I clearly lost all perspective in the process !! Apologies offered back at you, kitfox.

 

[masaccio]

Do you have a compatible off-camera flash? The chips canon uses are pretty accurate color-renderers with the spectrum a good flash throws.

oh, and nature vs. nurture? I think there is a lot of nurture showing through!

I haven't invested in flash yet. An acquaintance of mine is a pro. He covers film festivals and stuff like that. He probably knows all about it. Maybe he can offer some guidance as where to start. I think I'd like to make room for a permanent setup here at home so it's not such a pain to move stuff around and all that to get a decent shot. Thanks for asking.
Do you use exclusively Canon?