My first picture uploaded.

[Greg]

As I was instrumental in getting this section created I should be the first to have your comments, the good the bad and the unexpected.

What do you think of this picture?

 

[Hali]

Hi Greg, that's a beautiful picture. I love the delicate tones and the textures. It's a great point of view and the DOF is perfect. My only nit is that there is too much blank space on the left, I think I'd rather have seen it cropped in closer to the main flower and maybe have the negative space be equal to that on the right side by the right bloom or maybe have more space on the right side than the left, to me the right seems a bit cramped as is.

 

[Greg]

Hi Greg, that's a beautiful picture. I love the delicate tones and the textures. It's a great point of view and the DOF is perfect. My only nit is that there is too much blank space on the left, I think I'd rather have seen it cropped in closer to the main flower and maybe have the negative space be equal to that on the right side by the right bloom or maybe have more space on the right side than the left, to me the right seems a bit cramped as is.

I know what you mean about the cramptness. I was thinking about oy having 1 bloom. The orchid only has one bloom now but past its best. I can always post balance, I like to try to get as much correct in the camera. My post work is slow, mostly because I'm unfamiliar with the software. I had thought about fading the stalk almost to invisibility

I cannot take credit for the tones and textures, that's nature and perfect auto white balance.

It took me longer to set up than take the picture. I had to go out of the bathroom to use the remote, there is one point of the floor that moves everso slightly. You would not know until I put one leg of the tripod on it and it exaggerates it

 

[MaraLee]

LOL @ having to leave the bathroom due to the movement in the floor. Been there!

It's a nice capture, I love orchids. I can never leave a photo SOOC, though. Pretty much ANY digital photo begs to be processed unless it comes out of a cell phone IMO. If you shoot in jpg, the camera is doing its best guess at what your image should look like. Many times it's wrong. If you shoot in raw, it just gathers the data and throws it out there, leaving it up to you to bring it life, just like a tech in a darkroom. The initial file might look good, but it can often look so much better with a little processing. I'd probably start with just bringing the black down in the background to a true black. It may be all it needs to give it more depth. With a totally black background, you could increase the canvas size to move the orchid to the left and change your crop to open the right side to allow more room in front of the right-facing flower. Just thoughts on what you COULD do, probably easier to just re-shoot the flower if you were so inclined. LOL

That's not to say it should be over-done with the editing. Just a little help to bring it to life can do wonders. I normally only roll my finger on the trackpad when moving the sliders, I don't actually even 'slide' them. If you don't have the software, or you don't have the time/patience/etc., you can upload to Google Photos for free and use their editing tools. One click and you can see if there's any improvement over your SOOC file. Plus, they will accept Canon's CR3 files and won't compress them.

Okay, enough about processing, I'm sure you got my point there. It's still a beautiful bloom as is. Congrats on throwing out the first photo for critique!

 

[Greg]

Thanks for your words. I agree there are a few points that could be improved.

My photography started with a Kodak Bantam 61 years ago. It used 35mm film but not in a cassette as we know it. I used transparency film, it was expensive for a 13 yo pocket money. Every frame had to be right at the point of capture. Much later when I got my first SLR, a Canon AE1 I carried on with the same frugal frame of mind, still do it today but with less control. My photography now is worse because I can waste shots, I'm having to relearn

The beauty of the R5 is the perfection of capturing what is presented in front of the lens, its so easy especially compared with my, go to camera, Canon G1X currently selling on ebay.

Remember the old saying, 'the camera never lies'. The picture of this orchid is as near as damn it exactly as I see it. Yes the DOF is not as the eye sees it, everything else is, right down to the lighting. I must have had the camera set to to P, I don't remember setting the ISO to 320 that's an odd amount

 

[Shotbycurtin]

All cameras capture images in different ways, I don’t know of one that captures images as the eye truly sees things. One of the reasons for this is the dynamic range. The dynamic range of the eye is far greater than any camera. As you scan objects with your eye, it adjusts and notices aspects that stand out. Coupled with our other senses and map of the world, this is what makes memorable images. The camera will grab a reprentative image using a general setting, rather than adjustments across the image. Its the processing that helps make it memorable, some images needing more work than others.

Taking the image on face value, the feedback posted is excellent. It would be great if you posted another image taking the feedback and subsequent learning into account.

I was reticent to post feedback as I wasn’t sure what your primary intent was.; either genuine feedback or to test critiques lounge, or to test both. Being a bit of a cynic, the image looks set up to me with some obvious issues which have been mentioned, which made me think this. The image also looks upside down to me with the stems at the top. Apologies if this is not the case or your intention.

As previously stated, lighter, pale coloured flowers seem the hardest to snap, it’s a good effort which would benefit from some post processing.

 

[Greg]

All cameras capture images in different ways, I don’t know of one that captures images as the eye truly sees things. One of the reasons for this is the dynamic range. The dynamic range of the eye is far greater than any camera. As you scan objects with your eye, it adjusts and notices aspects that stand out. Coupled with our other senses and map of the world, this is what makes memorable images. The camera will grab a reprentative image using a general setting, rather than adjustments across the image. Its the processing that helps make it memorable, some images needing more work than others.

Taking the image on face value, the feedback posted is excellent. It would be great if you posted another image taking the feedback and subsequent learning into account.

I was reticent to post feedback as I wasn’t sure what your primary intent was.; either genuine feedback or to test critiques lounge, or to test both. Being a bit of a cynic, the image looks set up to me with some obvious issues which have been mentioned, which made me think this. The image also looks upside down to me with the stems at the top. Apologies if this is not the case or your intention.

As previously stated, lighter, pale coloured flowers seem the hardest to snap, it’s a good effort which would benefit from some post processing.

Thanks for your feedback

Yes, it's set up. The plant lives on my bathroom window sill.

Upside-down? You are half right. Orchids grow naturally in a hanging position. Commercially they are grown in pots and forced to stand upright, my example is one of them. The weight of a fall bloom of about 12 heads is heavy and droops down which is exactly what the picture shows.

My intention. Not sure. Originally testing for reactions, as its the first. Now it's happening I'm very gratefully

As explained earlier, my post op skills are poor, ok at basic crop, contrast, exposure, histogram is rubbish. I can see what the camera sees on my phone or tablet. I do my best to isolate an image, frame it (could have done better this time) and reproduce the object as closely as possible in the camera. In this instance, colour exposure are as life.

I know there is a trend to make things "pop", I think that is for the masses because of overload in the media, pics have to pop to be noticed. IMO, some professionals go along with that because their clients demand it. But it doesn't make it true. I was trying to get the truth

 

[GeraldHerd]

Exposure and colors good. For me, the three petals (probably not the right term for an orchid) outlined in red are the interesting part of the image . The background ones I highlighted yellow are distractions, especially that pinnacle in upper right and thin filament towards left. Were it my shot, I’d try a crop from top to just above the highest part of the red outline which should keep the background soft. And, if it didn’t work, that’s why Adobe invented the Undo Command.

Thanks for blazing the trail. Back 30 or 40 years ago that allowed you to post an image (scanned from a slide or negative) of maybe 400 pixels, 300Kb size and other members would rate it 1 to 4 stars and give a couple lines input what was good and bad about it. That’s how I learned to look out for tilted horizons, sticks growing out of people’s ears, not dividing an image right down the middle, etc. Hope this forum feature works out.