Flowers 2013

[Omega892]

Now your cooking Sury

but eating flowers is an acquired taste a bit like Guinness and Marmite.

[mvanrheenen]

Holy trousers Batman!

Those are some vivid colors!

Mark

[Birma]

Nice detail on that one Sury

[sury]

Now your cooking Sury

but eating flowers is an acquired taste a bit like Guinness and Marmite.

Thank you. Lionel, I take it as a complement.

Guinness? I agree. Not a big fan of beer in general though not averse to any kind of
spirit. Marmite. I don't remember ever tasting it. Only "generic" condiment I tried was
the so called 'brown sauce" in Cafeteria when I used to visit Scotland on work.

With best regards,
Sury

[sury]

Andy, Mark,
Thank you. Those flowers (I don't know what they are called) are brilliant indeed.
With temperature hitting 30oC there was plenty light to brighten them, not to mention
the flash.
I have to do more experiments with that 1:1 converter using a tripod. That lens combo
weight a ton on A900. They don't make lenses like they used to, in those days.

This one was a tad adventurous. The branch was swaying in the breeze and I held the ever
getting heavier camera in hand pulled the trigger.




With best regards,
Sury

[mvanrheenen]

For all those non-flash believers, here is a soft flowery shot made possible by use of a flash


Flower arrangement by markvanrheenen, on Flickr

[sury]

I like the purple flower Sury, but could you pump up the exposure in PP a bit, and perhaps pull up the blacks/shadows? Nice soft background.

Does this work Andy? Still on the weaker side of exposure?

Nice shot Mark. I would not have known that flash was used, had you not told us.

Sury

[Omega892]

For all those non-flash believers, here is a soft flowery shot made possible by use of a flash

Indeed, flash does not always have to yield a harsh result and then it depends upon the picture's intent, an artistic moody shot or detail in the subject. When taking pictures of small insects if detail is required the sharpness over the majority of the subject, even head only if looking straight on from the front, demands small aperture for depth of field plus one has to work so close that no mater where the natural light is coming from one is going to shade the subject. I see flash as the only option in these circumstances.

Case in point is this shot of a very small bee species on Sedum Autumn Joy taken using an A100 with Minolta 100mm Macro D with a reversed Rokkor 57mm f1.7 on the front. A mounting was improvised to marry a Minolta Macro Controller and Twin Flash 2400 in such a way as to provide light for the clsest optic which was about 15mm away from the subject. The 'petals' of the sedum are only about 2 to 3mm tall.



if a tighter vertical crop is better then here is one possibility, I spent some time experimenting on the crop area for best effect and this is it IMHO, but then picture evaluation does have a subjective element to it:



here is another one, of a red-tailed on contaneaster, with a different approach, this time using the A700 with Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G SSM (this is the quietest and quickest focusing lens I have beating the Minolta 80-200mm HS APO G) with RAYNOX MACRO LENS DCR-5320PRO and 5600 HSD with Stofen:



That Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G SSM when used in autofocus is the quietest and quickest focusing lens I have beating the Minolta 80-200mm HS APO G.

I get bad neck spasm after sessions like this.

EDIT. PS. Everybody seems to be putting their names on pictures now, have we all been spooked by resent UK legislation?

[mvanrheenen]

PS. Everybody seems to be putting their names on pictures now, have we all been spooked by resent UK legislation?

No, that's just one of the latest copyright/privacy infringment methods.

[Marcell Nikolausz]

Great details on your bee photos Omega892!
I always use flash for my macros but it's my personal style. Recently I'm not even trying to pretend to hide that the photo was taken under ambient light but contrary.
Today I had a bit of time in the nearby forest and I was happy that it was an overcast day and the ambient light didn't disturbe my twin flash adapter (on nex-5). The ramsons started to bloom but there are still lots of sprouts.
Some selected photos:







Full set: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fiberstrob ... 415830962/

Cheers

Marcell

[mvanrheenen]

Nice set Marcell.

[Birma]

Much better Sury - lots of nice detail to go with the subtle colour and lighting.

Very, very close-up bees Lionel - almost makes me take a step back from the computer .

Superbly lit close-ups as always Marcell.

[Omega892]

Very, very close-up bees Lionel - almost makes me take a step back from the computer .

Thanks Birma and they are good viewed printed on canvas using an A3+ printer at maximum size - i.e. shortest side at the 18 inch maximum.

Thanks Marcell, I have a few others of this obliging, considering my front optic bee was only mm away, they really love this plant. However I will have to put these on another thread as this one is primarily about flowers, but I figured the sedum looks good enough close up to excuse the bee presence.

[aster]

Hi everyone,

It's been a while since I posted any photos to any of the threads...I grabbed my A100 and the Tamron 90 mm out today and took a couple of what was blooming in the garden or the backyard.

Yildiz

yellow-red rose 2.jpg

(195.26 KiB) Downloaded 1383 times

yellow-red rose.jpg

(182.24 KiB) Downloaded 1383 times

Red Rose 1.jpg

(166.86 KiB) Downloaded 1383 times

RoseOutOfFocus.jpg

(160.55 KiB) Downloaded 1383 times

[aster]

White-pink rose .jpg

(239.4 KiB) Downloaded 1383 times

Pink Rose.jpg

(174.89 KiB) Downloaded 1383 times

Lilly.jpg

(193.78 KiB) Downloaded 1383 times

Fuschia ruose.jpg

(207.62 KiB) Downloaded 1383 times