Posts Tagged flower

Monet Moment

There are some things that after having photographed them time and time again I just don’t want to anymore; waterlilies are not one of them.  I look forward to them appearing every year at this one industrial park and even though I have been told by security to move my car once or twice, it doesn’t deter me.  Waterlilies make me want to sit and just be still with them – even though that never has happened as I am going back and forth with a camera – and remind me that one day I would love to see them in Giverny in Monet’s garden.

Maybe one day…

, , , , ,

9 Comments

In the shade of the pines

There lived a tiny little flower where the wee fae folks played…

, , , , , ,

4 Comments

Let the sunshine in…

f7.1 – 1/320 – ISO100 – 100mm macro lens – Canon 5D Mark III

, , , , , , , ,

10 Comments

Ruffles

The leaves here definitely look like tulip leaves but if you recall my post from yesterday – one of these things is not like the other!  We could be dealing with more than six petals here.  Anyone know the name of this frilly flower?

 

, , , , , ,

6 Comments

Color and Monochrome – Why they both work

Yesterday I featured this tulip in black and white and today I will compare it to it’s original color version.  In my opinion, both images stand well on their own “stems” (pun very much intended) for similar and different reasons.  With a color image the eye immediately takes notice of the colors – the white, yellow, pink and then green.  From there you begin to take in the entire image; the shape of the tulips petals, how they are arranges and the patterns in the petals.  I’ve found that while my eyes do notice the colors and the striations on the petals, I am drawn right to the center of the tulip by the leading color lines of the petals.  But what about the monochrome version?

In black and white, the eye is still drawn to the shape of the tulip and it’s petals and they do lead your eye right to the center of it but there are differences.  Obviously there is lack of color to attract you but that is replaced by the shadows and the contrasts; the darks and lights in the image.  What stands out more in this image than the color are the details of the tulip.  In monochrome the the variegation and the middle line in each petal revealed better.  Also the textures of the stigma, pistil, anthers etc. really stand out in monochrome as compared to color.  The texture of the anthers (those black stick like parts) really pop in black and white.  Viewing them close up in this version they remind me of used coffee grounds.

As stated early in this post, they are both good images for similar and different reasons.  Can you think of any other ways that they are the same or different?  Please share your thoughts in the comments section.

 

, , , , , , , ,

7 Comments

Monochrome Macro

Not every image that is in color will work well in black and white – and vice versa – but sometimes when there is enough contrast, details and texture in the subject as with this tulip, it converts very well.  I did a tight 1:1 crop on this photo in order to fill the frame with just the tulip bloom and added a warming filter to cut back on some of the cool tones of the original black and white edit. Tomorrow I will show you this tulip in color and talk about (in my opinion) what comes through best/better in one edit as compared to the other.

 

, , , , , , ,

5 Comments

Desert Beauty – High Eleven

I don’t know what type of cactus this is but if you know please let me know.  This cactus was one of many in the private garden of an RV park in Congress, Arizona.  It shared space with Methuselah the oldest known cactus in Arizona.  More about that old boy in this post.

(Decided to post some things I had in queue that I had forgotten about in the pile of other photos and posts.  It’s going to be this and that for a few days until I get another theme going)

High11-5359-Edit

 

, , , , , , ,

15 Comments