One awesome Periwinkle. :)): Lens: SMC Takumar F 70-210mm Camera: Pentax K-7 Photo Location: Sherwood Forest ISO: 100 Shutter Speed: 1/160s Aperture: F6.3. Aperture Priority Mode with...

Tonytee Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

Lens: SMC Takumar F 70-210mm Camera: Pentax K-7 Photo Location: Sherwood Forest ISO: 100 Shutter Speed: 1/160s Aperture: F6.3.

Aperture Priority Mode with Multi-Segment Metering. F/L @210mm.

A million and one thanks for viewing. )

Tony :))

RogStrix Loc: UK

sadly that seems to have lost definition in the UHH displayed picture, and on this side of the pond that's not a periwinkle as we know it?

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

I've never seen a periwinkle that colour.

Tonytee Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

RogStrix wrote:

sadly that seems to have lost definition in the UHH displayed picture, and on this side of the pond that's not a periwinkle as we know it?

Well, I wish I knew how to respond to this type of comment. :(

Tony

Tonytee Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

AzPicLady wrote:

I've never seen a periwinkle that colour.

According to the many Plant Identifier apps., each one identifies this subject as a Periwinkle.

Thank you. :))

Tony

RogStrix Loc: UK

Tonytee wrote:

Well, I wish I knew how to respond to this type of comment. :(

Tony

UHH unfortunately reduces the quality of inserted pictures to speed up loading times, the only way round it is to 'Add Attachment' by ticking the box. The downside of that is that you lose control of your images, which is why some people add a watermark showing ownership of their pictures.
As ever though your camera craft is excellent.

Tonytee Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

RogStrix wrote:

UHH unfortunately reduces the quality of inserted pictures to speed up loading times, the only way round it is to 'Add Attachment' by ticking the box. The downside of that is that you lose control of your images, which is why some people add a watermark showing ownership of their pictures.
As ever though your camera craft is excellent.

I understand what you are saying however, I do not feel as though there is a problem with image quality here.

There are some flowers that just do not possess a lot of detail in the petals and on a personal note, I do not always

like floral images that are so sharp they appear to be nothing more than a dried out potato chip. I have discovered

a little softness combined with the proper exposure, color replication and composition are attributes that profoundly contribute to Image Quality.

In this hobby/discipline, it all comes down to what the shooter finds to be most rewarding.

Thanks again,

Tony :)))

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Tonytee wrote:

Lens: SMC Takumar F 70-210mm Camera: Pentax K-7 Photo Location: Sherwood Forest ISO: 100 Shutter Speed: 1/160s Aperture: F6.3.

Aperture Priority Mode with Multi-Segment Metering. F/L @210mm.

A million and one thanks for viewing. )

Tony :))

Oh, a flower Periwinkle. I expected to see a seashell.

Tonytee Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

lamiaceae wrote:

Oh, a flower Periwinkle. I expected to see a seashell.

I will work on it. No problem. :))

Tony

RogStrix Loc: UK

Tonytee wrote:

I understand what you are saying however, I do not... (show quote)

As you are happy, then I am too, I wasn't being critical of the picture or your technique.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Tony wrote: "In this hobby/discipline, it all comes down to what the shooter finds to be most rewarding."

I agree but if the image is taken to a competition it will not meet their basic standards. It is a periwinkle and here in South Florida what I see are the deep red and white varieties more often.
I am not critical of your image either Tony I am just saying that judges will not accept the softness the image shows. We are all different and we see the world differently.

Tonytee Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

camerapapi wrote:

Tony wrote: "In this hobby/discipline, it all comes down to what the shooter finds to be most rewarding."

I agree but if the image is taken to a competition it will not meet their basic standards. It is a periwinkle and here in South Florida what I see are the deep red and white varieties more often.
I am not critical of your image either Tony I am just saying that judges will not accept the softness the image shows. We are all different and we see the world differently.

Again, I certainly appreciate your effort in offering some very helpful information. The only issue I will raise is this

section is not open to critique. It does state that criticism is welcomed when requested. I mention this only because

I have witnessed myself many heated and inflammatory exchanges reach a boiling point to where one or many

members have been permanently banned. There is a Critique Section here whose purpose is self-explanatory.

Unsolicited Critique and Editing often leads to serious problems between members and I certainly am one who

wishes to avoid such confrontations. This is not why I decided to get serious about photography more than five

decades ago. Again, many thanks for your well intentioned efforts.

Best wishes this Holiday Season. God Bless.

Tony :))