Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Blossoms amid the daisies  (Read 1860 times)
John R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1030


« on: May 07, 2009, 08:03:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Cherry blossoms amid the dandelions, not daisies as I previously wrote in error. Can't seem to change the title. Anyway, the first image ia an orton effect. And I just added a second image from the trip, no effect. The weather was becoming unsettled and the sun was manageable, appearing like a moon.

JMR
« Last Edit: May 09, 2009, 06:33:43 AM by John R » Logged
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5727



WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2009, 12:57:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Interesting, but those aren't daisies.  You've got a whole crop of Taraxacum officiniale there - dandelion.  Not a bad thing, though.  The young leaves can be eaten cooked or raw, they have high amounts of several vitamins, the dried and roasted roots can make a coffee substitute, there's dandelion wine, and where would little kids make flower crowns without dandelion flower stalks?

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
John R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1030


« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2009, 07:29:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: wolfnowl
Interesting, but those aren't daisies.  You've got a whole crop of Taraxacum officiniale there - dandelion.  Not a bad thing, though.  The young leaves can be eaten cooked or raw, they have high amounts of several vitamins, the dried and roasted roots can make a coffee substitute, there's dandelion wine, and where would little kids make flower crowns without dandelion flower stalks?

Mike.
Thanks for the comments. You are quite right, I made an error. Was thinking dandelions but wrote daisies. Shame on me!

JMR
Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #3 on: May 08, 2009, 07:05:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Assuming some of these are in focus, I don't see details, which makes me wonder if the digital camera is having a problem with that when there's a solid or near-solid color to the flowers. That has been a problem for me in most lighting.
Logged
John R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1030


« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2009, 06:36:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: dalethorn
Assuming some of these are in focus, I don't see details, which makes me wonder if the digital camera is having a problem with that when there's a solid or near-solid color to the flowers. That has been a problem for me in most lighting.
They are in focus, but softened because of the Orton treatment. It is meant to appear impressionistic and ethereal, not literal. The second image is straight. Thanks for the comments.

JMR
« Last Edit: May 09, 2009, 06:36:38 AM by John R » Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6190



WWW
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2009, 12:12:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: John R
They are in focus, but softened because of the Orton treatment. It is meant to appear impressionistic and ethereal, not literal. The second image is straight. Thanks for the comments.

JMR

John, Impressionism is something you do with a paintbrush. Attempts to do impressionism with a camera don't look ethereal; they look manipulated. I'd bet the original, before the "impressionism" was a nice snapshot of a field of dandelions. Nothing wrong with that.
Logged

dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #6 on: May 10, 2009, 04:52:21 PM »
ReplyReply

I wouldn't dream of asking anyone to put a "before and after" set on critique, but some people have done it of course. When I've done it, I usually got clobbered, so there you are.
Logged
John R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1030


« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2009, 04:56:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: RSL
John, Impressionism is something you do with a paintbrush. Attempts to do impressionism with a camera don't look ethereal; they look manipulated. I'd bet the original, before the "impressionism" was a nice snapshot of a field of dandelions. Nothing wrong with that.
I guess I would beg to differ. William Neil was just presented on this site. You can do this kind of photography (techniques really) in camera or in post processing, or a combination of the two. But it is as legitimate as any other kind of photography. The same can be accomplished in camera with multiple exposures. And sometimes I do this and sometimes I use both methods. We did this all the time when shooting slide film. PP is just another tool. I already gave one photo site reference to other people, but there are many more photographers that employ this technique. Of course, if you create an image that does not quite work, then one can say you were not successful. The orignal photo, what does that matter?

JMR
« Last Edit: May 11, 2009, 10:00:39 PM by John R » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad