winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

No FFF style fingerpainting here, I simply cranked up the SOOC jpeg to get the result that I was after.

(Download)

chaman

It seems underexposed and oversaturated to me. Composition and focus seem fine.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

And it's awesome. Yes, it's a bit dense, but then I like dense. And yes, it's heavily saturated, but that's what you wanted, right? The single flower and its leaves are beautifully separated from their neighbors. I do have a question. Have you printed this? I find brilliant reds and fuschias difficult to print. They tend to lose definition and come out a big coloured blob.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Just curious, Rob,
Are you hoping for a critique of the posted image, or a critique of what it was that you were "after"?

The first is easy.

The second requires an objective statement by you as to what you were "after" as well as a subjective statement by you as to how well you feel you succeeded. Critiquing such a subjective opinion is far more difficult.

In other regards, I hope all is well.

Dave

chaman

As a side note, when someone says, " I was after this and that....." it makes me ask myself. Really? Or are you just overexplaining and rationalizing the shortcomings of the image in order to AVOID an obvious critique? I ask because I see an image like this which is obviously underexposed and oversaturated and think...were you REALLY shooting for this? Or were you trying to raise some interest after seeing how underexposed it was by oversaturating it? Of course a very high degree on honesty would be needed to accept that. Just some food for thought.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

If you reread what I wrote I said that this is a SOOC photograph.

I did not take it home and try to make a forgettable, too dark snap, which was under exposed because I failed to take the time, and fingerpainting it in Photoshop in an attempt to making it into something 'arty'.

What you see is how I intended it to appear.

A small but standout flower in that dark background, so I bumped up the camera's Picture Control and Exposure Control settings to produce this jpeg.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

The image turned out pretty well the way I wanted it to, Dave, so what you see is what I was 'after'.

It is not an attempt to produce a realistically rendered photograph of the plant and flower which is easy.

I wished here to produce something with a degree of poster-like 'pop' and by having some knowledge of the necessary settings, I achieved it in-camera without having to muck around with a bunch of Photoshop filters.

Whether you like it or not is, of course personal.

And thank you, all is well.......

chaman

Dont need to re read anything, got it the first time. What I dont get is the image. So, you went for a underexposed image with over saturation to make the flower stand out? You manage the first two, except for making the flower stand out. If thats what you wanted...thats what you got, BUT the flower does not stand out, IMO. I guess I fail to see the point of this exercise.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

The flower is the pink blob in the middle off to the right.......

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Actually, I was pretty sure that it had turned out "...pretty well the way..." you wanted it to.
So, I looked closer to see what that was, because it wasn't, to my eye, immediately obvious.

my first and strongest reaction to the image was being struck/ almost startled...chromatically...by the strong complementary nature of lotsa rich greens/leaves and a lesser number of blossoms or parts thereof. The rich spectral greens of a variety of values and the strong non-spectral magenta of the floral components was, and still is, the major impact to me. i must, however, note that your use of a shallow depth of field to isolate that twig and its leaves and largest blossom took some time to wend it way through and among the reverberating greens and magentas to reach my personal threshold of conscious perception ("conscious perception"...is that redundant? not necessarily, IMO...but I digress)

Anyway, I was, evidently, not the only one not to be immediately struck by any "popping" of the sharply focused twig, leaves, and blossom from the BG. I note this not as a critique, just a curiosity. Even now, aware of the "DOF isolation" as I am, I still have to look closely to see just where it is....simply because, for me, the strong complementary nature of the image's two significant hues is the overwhelming impact that very successfully distracts from the desired "popping" effect.

It does illustrate, I think, the occasional phenomenon of a photographer planning on and, to his eye, acheiving a particular impactful effect that may, to a viewer unfamiliar with the photographer's visualization and intent , be missed, or at least perceived at a far lower level of impact.

Dave

Nightski

Red channel is blown, background is distracting.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Red channel was fully saturated in an attempt to make the flower stand out which apparently was not 100% successful.
As for the distracting background, here's a version which (hopefully) will satisfy both your kind self and chaman equally.....

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Thanks Dave, it appears that the image drew your attention for more than the two seconds, which, in my case, if exceeded, denotes the possibility that there might be some merit to what is presented.

May I therefore conclude that you are of a similar opinion?

Cheers, Rob.