Tri, thank you very much..
Jonathan, this is a wonderful image.. I could stare at it whole day.Originally Posted by jcoldslabs
Take one. This one's a bit underexposed, unfortunately. The film has lost more speed from age than I anticipated.
Kodak 2D 8X10, 240mm Hugo Meyer Doppel Anastigmat, Tri-X (expired 1976).
Jonathan
May I ask what kind of plant is that?
Thank you. The flowering branch is from a tree in our neighbor's front yard. I looked it up and as best I can tell it is a crab apple tree. When I took the clippings a few days ago the flowers on the tree were white. They have since turned pink and are already starting to fall onto the ground.
J.
I'm just starting out taking still life and flower shots. Very keen to get feedback and advice on how to do better, particularly with how to use lights, and lenses to get the best results. I have flipped the shot as I like the look this way. There was a LED light to the bright side at full brightness. Something I have just started doing is using lights and I wonder if I should have toned down the light to get more even brightness across the entire flowers. Maybe using a dark background and table top would have helped emphasise the light reflections on the jewellery and vase. My first use of the lens also, happy with the results.
Horseman 450 EM
Imagon 300mm (barrel)
f5.9 @ 1/60
HP5
Rodinal 1:50, 6.5min.
Comments encouraged.
Colin
Another one taken the same day. LED light from the right, I hoped the glass jewellery would sparkle to get the best effect with the lens but after much adjusting with no real impact I gave up. Learning the light placement to get the right effect is another thing I have to practice.
Horseman 450 EM
Imagon 300mm (barrel)
f9.5 @ 1/60
HP5
Rodinal 1:50, 6.5min
Let me preface my comments by saying that these are just my opinions and personal preferences.
Here I would say a couple things. Regarding the composition, the two edges of the table within the frame are somewhat distracting to the image. It would be best to find a way to compose without including these edges.
The lighting is certainly not bad, but in my opinion, would be a little better if it was softer. The most effective way to accomplish this would be to use a larger light source (more surface area). This would still provide the nice directional lighting, would make the shadows more defocused, and would provide a little more detail (light) to the shadow areas of the flower.
Your second image does a better than the first with both composition and lighting, IMO. In fact I probably wouldn't change the lighting at all in the latter.
Thanks Jeremy, it was my first effort with the light and your observations seem spot on. Next time I'm going to use the diffuser that came with the light to tone it down. Using the table is something else I am working on, most other contributors seem to just show the table top, when the edge is shown it is usually with a lot of the table in the frame. Anyway more testing to come.
Jonathan, That is just beautiful!Originally Posted by jcoldslabs
Take one. This one's a bit underexposed, unfortunately. The film has lost more speed from age than I anticipated.
Kodak 2D 8X10, 240mm Hugo Meyer Doppel Anastigmat, Tri-X (expired 1976).
Jonathan
Thanks, Jan. As a side note, I'm still using the motor base I got from you a while back. This negative was processed using it.
Jonathan
8x10 expired Ektachrome, Gundlach Radar.
Scan-130406-0007www by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr
Continuing with my "aerial view" theme from the Still Life thread.
Pacemaker Speed Graphic, 210mm Hugo Meyer Doppel-Anastigmat, TMY (expired 1998).
Jonathan
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks