Backlit anenomes

[GardenersHelper]

I don't usually use my FZ200 bridge camera for flowers, but I was out in the garden photographing insects and spiders late afternoon a couple of days ago when I saw these and couldn't be bothered to go and fetch one of my larger sensor cameras (which I think render flower colours and textures better than the FZ200). These were captured using natural light, with a mild close-up lens on the FZ200, a Canon 500D. The raw files were processed in DXO Optics Pro 10 to produce DNG files that were then processed in Silkypix Developer Pro 7 to produce TIFF files that were then processed in Dfine 2 (possibly with some cloning in Photoshop CS2 for one or two of them - I don't recall) before resizing to 1300 pixel high JPEGs in Faststone Image Viewer for uploading to this album at Flickr.

1

0948 34 2016_08_29 P1300954_DxO10 RAW 01cP DNG SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

2

0948 35 2016_08_29 P1300955_DxO10 RAW 01cP DNG SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

3

0948 36 2016_08_29 P1300956_DxO10 RAW 01cP DNG SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

4

0948 39 2016_08_29 P1300961_DxO10 RAW 01cP DNG SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

5

0948 40 2016_08_29 P1300966_DxO10 RAW 01cP DNG SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

6

0948 42 2016_08_29 P1300993_DxO10 RAW 01cP DNG SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

7

0948 45 2016_08_29 P1300996_DxO10 RAW 01cP DNG SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

8

0948 46 2016_08_29 P1300998_DxO10 RAW 01cP DNG SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

 

[Emja]

They are beautiful flowers Nick. i like the slightly surreal backlit background in 6 and the light and shadow through the petals in all of them. Maybe a reflector might have helped pick out more detail in the centre of the flowers without losing this effect?

 

[GardenersHelper]

They are beautiful flowers Nick. i like the slightly surreal backlit background in 6 and the light and shadow through the petals in all of them. Maybe a reflector might have helped pick out more detail in the centre of the flowers without losing this effect?

Thanks Emma. Good idea about the reflector - I have a fold-up one but haven't used it for ages. I'd forgotten about it actually. Definitely worth a try.

It would be interesting to find out whether it would flatten the contrast too much, or kill the shadows. It would also be interesting to see how practical it is to use a reflector - a lot of the shot alignments were rather precise and I don't know how well I could do that one-handed while holding a reflector in the other hand. Putting the reflector on a tripod probably wouldn't be practical in some cases as another complication is that I may (shhhh, don't tell the gardener) have my feet (rather carefully, of course ) placed in the flower bed, sometimes contorted in strange positions, arms outstretched, awkwardly balancing etc to align some of the shots. Don't think hand or tripod would work well for the reflector in such cases.

There again, it may be fine. Only one way to find out. If we get some late afternoon sun before the flowers go over I shall experiment!

 

[Norkie]

Like very much No5

 

[plamen_gb]

NIce set, interesting choice to take the shots with the light opposite the camera

 

[GardenersHelper]

NIce set, interesting choice to take the shots with the light opposite the camera

Thanks Plamen. Shooting into the light is a favourite for me with flowers when the opportunity arises.

 

[GardenersHelper]

Thanks Emma. Good idea about the reflector - I have a fold-up one but haven't used it for ages. I'd forgotten about it actually. Definitely worth a try.

It would be interesting to find out whether it would flatten the contrast too much, or kill the shadows. It would also be interesting to see how practical it is to use a reflector - a lot of the shot alignments were rather precise and I don't know how well I could do that one-handed while holding a reflector in the other hand. Putting the reflector on a tripod probably wouldn't be practical in some cases as another complication is that I may (shhhh, don't tell the gardener) have my feet (rather carefully, of course ) placed in the flower bed, sometimes contorted in strange positions, arms outstretched, awkwardly balancing etc to align some of the shots. Don't think hand or tripod would work well for the reflector in such cases.

There again, it may be fine. Only one way to find out. If we get some late afternoon sun before the flowers go over I shall experiment!

@Emja I did the experiment (didn't even need to step on the flower bed. )

The results were varied. Sometimes the reflector made an obvious difference. There were a couple of sequences where I did a run of shots alternating between using and not using the reflector (two pairs in one sequence, four pairs in the other) and the same sort of difference was there between each pair. In some other paired sequences there appeared to be no difference at all. I think that may be because the sun was coming through gaps in foliage and it was difficult to get the reflector arranged so it was actually reflecting the sunlight. So perhaps the reflector wasn't actually doing anything useful in those cases. (Didn't I see what was going on? No. Handling the camera and the reflector was rather awkward, drawing my attention elsewhere, and the reflector may well have "wandered" while I was lining up shots. Also, I couldn't see the reflective side of the reflector when taking the photos so as to check the light was actually hitting it.)

The situation was also confused by the fact that it was breezy and the illumination was continually and rapidly changing because of the foliage was moving around and so sometimes the direct light hit the flowers and sometimes it didn't, and the flowers were moving around too, with a similar effect. So some of the time there were differences but I couldn't work out exactly what the cause of the differences were.

Still, there were the two obvious cases I mentioned. I shot raw as usual, but here are the out of the camera JPEGs (that are embedded in the raw files) for a pair from one of those sequences. The one using the reflector is on the right. The centre of the flower is indeed brighter and more visible.


Reflector comparison OOC JPEG by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

However, here is a comparison after I had applied the "one size fits all" batch processing that apply to all my images before going on to any image-specific adjustments. I didn't make any image-specific adjustments in this case, so they have both had the same processing. The batch process starts with DXO Optics Pro and then uses Silkypix, in both cases using the same settings for both images. From my point of view, this is a more meaningful comparison than the out of the camera JPEG, because this is what I get to work on after the batch processing is done.


Reflector comparison same PP DXO + Silkypix by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

It is a matter of personal taste, but I actually prefer the look of the one on the left, that didn't use the reflector. Of course, the proper comparison is with how they look after image-specific adjustments. It is difficult to give a definitive example of that, because so much depends on exactly what you do. In general terms though I wasn't inclined to do much to the unreflected one, but the centre of the flower in the reflected one looked a bit unnatural to me, a bit like when you use just a little too much fill flash. The trouble is that pulling down the brightness of the centre of the flower pulls down the brightness of the petals and gives an overall dull (not bright) look compared to the unreflected version. The flower (centre and petals ) in the reflected version also looked rather flat (low contrast) to me.

I might have been able to modify the balance of light to get something I liked better in the reflected version by getting into more complicated processing, perhaps including local processing, but I wasn't keen on that as I already had a version that looked more or less acceptable to me.

It is very much a matter of personal taste and preferences, for working methods, types of shot, the look of images and post processing methods. For me though, from this admittedly very tiny experiment, both in terms of the visual results and the hassle of using a reflector, I am inclined to continue working without a reflector. Your mileage may well vary of course.

 

[Emja]

Your methodical approach is very impressive Nick...I could learn a lot!

Reflectors can definitely be a little unwieldy...I confess to conscripting my 7 year old as photographic assistant at times...well he has to earn his pocket money somehow...

I can see how the changing light conditions would have made it very difficult to predict exactly how it was impacting on the subject as well, and I agree that in your finished version I prefer the left hand shot, but I think it might have more detail in the centre (from memory) than a couple of the original shots? Could you have used local adjustments to pull down the centre without affecting the petals? I tend to pick out one or two shots that I really like from a session, so don't tend to do batch processing but that can result in inconsistent processing, I think.

Thanks so much for sharing this - it's been fascinating to see. Apologies for taking so long to respond - it's been a very hectic return to work this week after a few weeks off. I might suffer big photo withdrawal over the next few weeks

 

[GardenersHelper]

Your methodical approach is very impressive Nick...I could learn a lot!

Reflectors can definitely be a little unwieldy...I confess to conscripting my 7 year old as photographic assistant at times...well he has to earn his pocket money somehow...

And perhaps he will enjoy photography himself one day (or perhaps he already does?).

I can see how the changing light conditions would have made it very difficult to predict exactly how it was impacting on the subject as well, and I agree that in your finished version I prefer the left hand shot, but I think it might have more detail in the centre (from memory) than a couple of the original shots?

I think that is right.

Could you have used local adjustments to pull down the centre without affecting the petals?

To some extent, yes, but I suspect the spread of the ... don't know what they are called, the thin things poking out all around the central spherical part ... I think they might make it difficult to get a credible boundary between the lightened area and the rest. But certainly, to some extent, yes.

I tend to pick out one or two shots that I really like from a session, so don't tend to do batch processing but that can result in inconsistent processing, I think.

The batch processing is the start of the post processing (well, after an initial selection of course). But after the batch processing I process the shots individually. So like you I do have to watch out for inconsistency.

Thanks so much for sharing this - it's been fascinating to see. Apologies for taking so long to respond - it's been a very hectic return to work this week after a few weeks off. I might suffer big photo withdrawal over the next few weeks

No need to apologise. It's a hobby not an obligation. Take care.