#2 grabbed my eye immediately. It's a different way of looking at a flower, not just the same old shot from the common perspective, no matter how artfully composed and exposed and focused. It shows me something in a way that I don't usually see. The cropped off pedals are unimportant because the viewers mind fills in the missing pieces. That's my opinion. Other opinions about your posting shows that others have different opinions.
There is no consensus in this highly subjective field of endeavor. You are the creator, thus the question is "What do you like?"
I second photogeneralist's comments. I looked at the first one and thought, "Nice." At the second one, "Wow," much more immediate impact. Which to me is more important than an analysis, but ignoring that, the petals of the second one lead you into the central bud-base (or whatever you call it) which sparkles with detail. The undeveloped bud at the lower left distracts, particularly because it seems to come from nowhere, and I would crop it out, perhaps shifting the crop upwards to exclude that bulb and include more of the petal tips at the top. But it is fine as is.
Riverrat2 wrote:
that is the question. I hope some of you with the "good eye" will tell me which you prefer and why.
Definitely crop. Too much empty space in #1 to support your subject. Experiment with different crops.
#2 is the best. Way more dramatic than #1.
The crop shows the essence of the bloom and its origin of the bud. But the wide shows the essence of the light that feeds it.
I'd crop just enough from the lower left of the first shot to get rid of that bottom leaf on the stem. Then the flower would have a little more room in front of it, a little less behind.
Thank you all for your suggestions. I will try them all.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.