June Flowers in July – 2014

This will be positively orgasmic to them who like shallow depth of field. Or, maybe, they are so used to fuzzy pictures that this will be all “ho-hum; is this all you got!?

You see, on June 7th (hence the title), I went out and shot flowers without switching to Aperture mode. I let the 105mm Macro lens and D7000 work out their respective preferences to shoot as fast as they could. I knew the end result would be, but I was still surprised . . . fuzzy, out-of-focus, indistinct photos all over the place. Here, let me show you . . .

Flowers,

I like the details of the in-focus portions of the photograph, but strain to see what kind of world hides in the out-of-focus areas. For all I know, dragons be there, but we’ll never know.

These next two photos also sport the fabled narrow depth of field admired by so many.

Flowers, Flowers,

By the way . . . as usual, there is a SmugMug Gallery HERE, but you can also click on the photos and a larger version (but not original size) will open in another window. I’m not giving the names of the flowers because I don’t remember them all, I’m too lazy to look them up, and I did not want to have names for some and not for others.

Contrast the previous two photos with these next two photos . . .

Flowers,

I know many photographers – true photographers, not like me – turned away in horror, shielding their eyes lest they gather in too much ‘focus’. But come on! . . . tell me that looks awful. And what about this one?

Flowers,

OK, OK . . . I’ll return to the “what’s that in the background?” look.

We like pansies, but we usually like multiple colors. Unfortunately, for reasons unexplained Dutch Gardens only had deep blue/purple, so that’s what we got. But you know what? They look pretty good.

Flowers,

These were shot in full sun . . . excuse me while I take a bite of sugared strawberries with ice cream and whipped cream . . . man, that’s good!

So, where where we? Ah, yes . . . full sun. The problem is their center is very bright, and the details get washed out. Shoot them slower, and you lose the texture of the leaves. Shoot them during an overcast sky, and you get a dark blob with a yellow dot at the center. Shooting them in full sun gives me more post-processing latitude.

Flowers,

If you bother to go to the SmugMug gallery, the full size version of this photo you will see the details of the filaments and tiny anthers forming the white mass right above the yellow.

By the way, the flower itself always reminds me of a volcano with lava pouring over the top. Maybe that’s just me.

These next flowers are always difficult for me to capture, but not if I don’t worry about having everything in focus.

Flowers,Flowers,

Flowers,

I do admit, begrudgingly, that it can sometimes be useful to play with shallow depth of field . . .

Flowers,

The above photo can be imagined as a flower floating in water, and new flowers coming up from the deep to join it. Or not.

Flowers,

Personally, I would have preferred a sharp image showing me a clear photo of the filaments and anthers .

Flowers,

One of my favorite flowers . . . regardless of the focus.

Flowers,

I guess the center is what draws the eyes, so it doesn’t matter about the focus at the periphery (almost).

Flowers,

Bee Balm . . . dang! I wasn’t going to name any of the flowers. Drat! . . . Anyway, Bee Balm is another flower that I try to capture with deep focus (another difficult thing to do). Still, I suppose these can work.

Flowers,

By the way, my playlist just hit Strange Advance’s Worlds Away. Not a bad July 4th, this is shaping up to be. 

And now we come to red flowers . . . guess what? If I change the camera setting (in Lightroom) to ‘Neutral’, don’t do any other processing, then send the picture to onOne’s Effects and give it my patentable subtle processing, then apply mild post-onOne-processing in Lightroom (adjust exposure, noise, and a couple of other sliders as needed), I end up with pictures of red flowers that are not all that objectionable, and are pretty close to what I saw in the pots.

Flowers, Flowers, Flowers,Heck, even these come out reasonable-like . . .

Flowers, Flowers,

And you know what? That also works for bright yellows and bright white.

Flowers, Flowers,

Now, I did shoot a closeup of the above flower . . . 

Flowers,

When I looked at the photo, I grabbed the camera and ran out to see if I could get a better picture of those critters. You see, for the second time I photographed the flower without noticing them. I looked, but the white flower was on its last legs, and nary a small creature was to be seen. I still don’t know what they are, but I aim to be more vigilant and find out.

Them who be wondering about all the small yellow specks all over everything . . . pine dust (pollen). In early June everything gets a yellow coating (we don’t leave the windows open, otherwise it coats everything in the house).  

Once again I missed most of the columbines (doh! . . . I did it again – named a flower).

Flowers,

I caught those in the evening light . . . then I snapped one of these flowers (they are on a bush I’ve never bothered to identify).

Flowers,

But, back to the columbines. These are from Seeds I brought from Michigan. While they did sprout, and do bloom, they did not take over the area where I planted them, unlike what they did in Michigan. 

Flowers,

Still, nine years, and the plants come up year after year. Stunted, but they come up. Short flowering, but they come up. Sparse, but they come up everywhere I had put down some seeds. Ain’t Nature grand?

Flowers, Flowers,

I usually try to harvest the seeds and throw them in other places I’d like to see these come up . . . so far, no luck.

Anyway, here’s a few straggler photographs, and then I’m calling it quits. Got me a story to write.

Flowers, Flowers, Flowers,

That’s it . . . . this post has ended, except for the stuff below.

 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o o o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Crack Teddy Bear

Crack Teddy Bear

Astute persons might have noticed these doodles, and correctly surmised they hold some significance for me, and perhaps for humanity at large.  

If you click on the doodle, and nothing happens, this is the link it’s supposed to go to: https://disperser.wordpress.com/2011/12/26/palm-vx-and-i/.

<><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><>

Note: if you are not reading this blog post at Disperser.Wordpress.com, know that it has been copied without permission, and likely is being used by someone with nefarious intention, like attracting you to a malware-infested website.  Could be they also torture small mammals.

<><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><>

Please, if you are considering bestowing me recognition beyond commenting below, refrain from doing so.  I will decline blogger-to-blogger awards.   I appreciate the intent behind it, but I prefer a comment thanking me for turning you away from a life of crime, religion, or making you a better person in some other way.  That would mean something to me.

If you wish to know more, please read below.

About awards: Blogger Awards
About “likes”:   Of “Likes”, Subscriptions, and Stuff

Note: to those who may click on “like”, or rate the post; if you do not hear from me, know that I am sincerely appreciative, and I thank you for noticing what I do.

. . .  my FP ward  . . . chieken shit.

About disperser

Odd guy with odd views living an odd life during odd times.
This entry was posted in Flowers, Macro Photography, Photography, Photography Stuff and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to June Flowers in July – 2014

  1. oneowner says:

    The columbines (dang, I wasn’t going to mention the name) are my favorite. Deep focus, shallow focus, I don’t care as long as there is something in focus. If I were shooting I would go for deep focus as required in documentary style. For my personal preference, I would choose to concentrate focus on a particular feature of a flower and let the sharp point of focus draw your attention. The out of focus or “soft focus” can be just as important, though.

    Like

    • disperser says:

      I was having a bit of fun . . . tongue-in-out-of-focus-cheek, if you will.

      I do recognize the usefulness of using focus to focus on focus-worthy features.

      Like

  2. seekraz says:

    Pretty damn wonderful images, I’d say…. Very nice, Emilio.

    Like

  3. sandra getgood says:

    I like the way I look at one of your flower pictures and see more than just a picture of a flower from your garden, although I don’t always have a clue what makes the images so interesting. Sometimes you’ve messed around with the color ( I suppose there is a nicer way of saying that) or the texture, or the focus, but whatever it is, I find myself looking at the flowers in my garden more closely, and sometimes seeing something I might not have noticed before. Thank you for that. And these are beautiful. Your pictures so often are.

    Like

    • disperser says:

      Oddly enough, I don’t mess around too much, and if I do, I mention it,

      I call the current processing “light touch” because that’s what I was going for.

      That said, the camera captures things differently than our eyes, and also many of these are the equivalent of having one’s nose about three inches from the flower, something most of us do not do. I typically aim to show details we take for granted. Some flowers are amazingly complex both in their construction, and the transformations they go through from bud to seed.

      Thanks for stopping by and for the kind words.

      Like

  4. I liked them all but the first foxgloves were my favourites as they are a very difficult flower to photograph to its advantage. Technically your whites are fantastic, I can’t succeed with whites or yellow. Amelia

    Like

  5. I love the columbines. They are beautiful, but the columbines are my favorite.

    Like

  6. AnnMarie says:

    This is one beauti-filled post! Way too many awesome photos for me to pick a favorite. Though I gotta add that something just ain’t right for me with that shallow depth of field . . . sometimes it works (the floating on water flower) and sometimes it doesn’t (the first photo). I’m just sayin’ . . .

    Like

    • disperser says:

      Yeah, you and me both. However, it’s been windy pretty much every day, so I can’t shoot at a smaller aperture without really bumping up the ISO (more grain), so many of these shots are a compromise in settings.

      Like

Voice your opinion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s