Sunflower Macro

[Nicole Hanna]

Sunflower seems to be the theme in Macro Critique right now. It's how I get my spring fix without it actually being spring yet here in Michigan (32 degrees right now and dropping). Maybe it's a daisy. I'm not even sure. lol

Nikon D90
Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro Lens
Shutter Speed 1/160
Aperture f/5
ISO 280 (Manual)
PP in Photoscape

Just really wondering about the post-processing effect, color, composition, whether or not it works as a whole. If there's an area that could use improvement. So forth and so on. Any opinions and suggestions are appreciated.

[chicagojohn]

Originally Posted by Nicole Hanna

Sunflower seems to be the theme in Macro Critique right now. It's how I get my spring fix without it actually being spring yet here in Michigan (32 degrees right now and dropping). Maybe it's a daisy. I'm not even sure. lol

Nikon D90
Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro Lens
Shutter Speed 1/160
Aperture f/5
ISO 280 (Manual)
PP in Photoscape

Just really wondering about the post-processing effect, color, composition, whether or not it works as a whole. If there's an area that could use improvement. So forth and so on. Any opinions and suggestions are appreciated.

I like it. It's very colorful and dynamic. Dynamic is the key thing. It seems almost spinning outward toward the viewer in both focus and color.

I've spent some time trying to imagine it better, but my imagination can't improve much upon what you've done. Love it.

TFS

[Nicole Hanna]

Thanks so much!

[photog1107]

This is fabulous! Great perspective and composition. Very surreal with the colors; you've done a great job of taking the ordinary and making it extraordinary.

[LeeR]

Sometimes when an image is good in a certain way it almost demands a portfolio. In this image you have taken some big risks and broken some fundamental rules in a way that begs the question, "Is this the work of a consistently good artist, or is it a fluke?" I love the image, your risks appear to have paid off nicely. Now, go prove you can do this again.

[Nicole Hanna]

Originally Posted by photog1107

This is fabulous! Great perspective and composition. Very surreal with the colors; you've done a great job of taking the ordinary and making it extraordinary.

Thank you! I appreciate that you took the time to stop by and comment.

[Nicole Hanna]

Originally Posted by LeeR

Sometimes when an image is good in a certain way it almost demands a portfolio. In this image you have taken some big risks and broken some fundamental rules in a way that begs the question, "Is this the work of a consistently good artist, or is it a fluke?" I love the image, your risks appear to have paid off nicely. Now, go prove you can do this again.

It's a fluke. lol. I get lucky. I take fifty shots and like this one, and the rest end up deleted. I'll take a shot... say nope, don't like the way a particular petal falls out of or into frame, and it's gone. Or hate the saturation of light in the background because the sun happened to be behind the clouds that second, so that one is gone too. I just keep shooting it until I like it. Not sure if that denotes talent, or just plain stubbornness. And sometimes I'm not even sure if I like it, so I play with it for days in post processing before I reconcile that I either love it or hate it. I did very little to this in post-processing it, and it was my favorite for the day, so I can't say I'm unhappy that it has received good responses. It's nice to get it right once in a while. Thanks for stopping by. I'm happy to have posted something that has been enjoyed.

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by Nicole Hanna

It's a fluke. lol. I get lucky. I take fifty shots and like this one, and the rest end up deleted. I'll take a shot... say nope, don't like the way a particular petal falls out of or into frame, and it's gone. Or hate the saturation of light in the background because the sun happened to be behind the clouds that second, so that one is gone too. I just keep shooting it until I like it. Not sure if that denotes talent, or just plain stubbornness. And sometimes I'm not even sure if I like it, so I play with it for days in post processing before I reconcile that I either love it or hate it. I did very little to this in post-processing it, and it was my favorite for the day, so I can't say I'm unhappy that it has received good responses. It's nice to get it right once in a while. Thanks for stopping by. I'm happy to have posted something that has been enjoyed.

As long as you know why an image looks good and another one doesn't. You wouldn't have talent if you just randomly shot and thought "hmm that one looks better than those, but I'm not sure why."

[LeeR]

Originally Posted by Nicole Hanna

It's a fluke. lol. I get lucky. I take fifty shots and like this one, and the rest end up deleted. I'll take a shot... say nope, don't like the way a particular petal falls out of or into frame, and it's gone. Or hate the saturation of light in the background because the sun happened to be behind the clouds that second, so that one is gone too. I just keep shooting it until I like it. Not sure if that denotes talent, or just plain stubbornness. And sometimes I'm not even sure if I like it, so I play with it for days in post processing before I reconcile that I either love it or hate it. I did very little to this in post-processing it, and it was my favorite for the day, so I can't say I'm unhappy that it has received good responses. It's nice to get it right once in a while. Thanks for stopping by. I'm happy to have posted something that has been enjoyed.

I don't consider one in fifty a fluke. Actually, that's not a bad ratio. Sure, we all want our ratio of good shots to bad to be as good as possible, but even the greats throw away far more than they keep. Ansel Adams said he worked all year to get ten good shots. I once saw a contact sheet of shots taken by Henri Cartier-Bresson and most of them were not worth noting; one was spectacular. If this is the case then certainly getting it right every time is not as important as whether or not you can assemble enough great images for an impressive portfolio. You have one, now you need 15-20 more.

[Nicole Hanna]

Originally Posted by LeeR

I don't consider one in fifty a fluke. Actually, that's not a bad ratio. Sure, we all want our ratio of good shots to bad to be as good as possible, but even the greats throw away far more than they keep. Ansel Adams said he worked all year to get ten good shots. I once saw a contact sheet of shots taken by Henri Cartier-Bresson and most of them were not worth noting; one was spectacular. If this is the case then certainly getting it right every time is not as important as whether or not you can assemble enough great images for an impressive portfolio. You have one, now you need 15-20 more.

Thanks so much for the encouraging words! I started out with 1 out 200 being good shots, so my odds of having a good portfolio in a year or two are increasing. One good shot is not a bad place to start. Now if I can just get a landscape shot that I actually think is decent!