DSLRUsers.com

I have gone for tulips for my project. These are shot on 4x5 Tri-X 320, developed in Rodinal, scanned with the D200 and then inverted and adjusted in PS.

I would appreciate your comments on both the image in absolute terms and then between the two in relative terms. The difference is only a very slight blur to soften. The first has no blur (if it is not obvious). Largely, these digital files are more for observance of the composition, lighting, exposure and development of the image rather than critical assessment.

The changes are subtle, i find the first much more enjoyable, if that counts for anything.

The first - the blur in the second is distracting - I actually looked at the pictures first and then read your text btw - so I'd already decided I liked the first better and why before reading that you'd blurred the second (I figured you'd just had a slight breeze or camera shake or too slow a shutter in the second)

Thanks guys, looks like no blur.

I am particularly keen on opinions in absolute terms, about whether the picture works and, if not, why. I have invested a lot into this in the context of: new and old gear (based on previous "Am I correct" thread), adapting processes to this gear, developing 4x5 negs, etc. Because the process 'worked' for me, I may be biased towards the image.

These images will lead to an entry in a photo comp, and therefore, I want to produce the absolute best I can. Given this, an independent review of the image in and of itself is appreciated.

Incidentally, the above do not represent the final scans or crops - once I have the negs I am happy with, I will get them drum scanned at a much higher resolution. So, I wish to concentrate on: subject matter, lighting and exposure.

I do have another tulip bud that looks more aesthetic than this one, but I am not 100% sure it will open or at least open in time.

I too prefer the first without the blur. Compositionally I would suggest a little more room above the flower head, I would aslo be inclined to try adding more negative space on the left hand side.

Patrick
The image does not work for me...it has a number of problems...little seperation from the background. Background too fussy. No obvious point of major interest, (what first catches the eye?). The top of the tulip bud is too close to the top of the frame. Lack of definite contrast between foreground and background. No hook that grabs the eye and stops it.
Having said all that, I can see where you are going with this technique and I think you are on the right track. The tones and graduations are beautiful. I think you need a flower on the stalk...with some soft backlighting coming through the petals to create the major point of interest. Perhaps a little backlight on the stalk. You are in the ball park so don't walk away from this one. Crack it!

I appreciate the comments.

Matt, I can see the validity in your comments. What is worth understanding, which may not change the view on this image, is that this will be part 1 of a 3 part series. The series will document the three primary stages of the flower from bud, to flower, to, I guess, death. In isolation, this bud doesn't have much going for it. Together with the other two, I am hoping it has greater impact.

This is a similar image of another flower that I posted the other day, which I believe has some of the elements you suggest. The reason I went for the tulip was because it is going to flower sooner - I have a deadline of mid September to complete the series and I am concerned the flower below won't.



I personally believe this composition and lighting works better - particularly given your comments regarding the background.

Thoughts?

Here are 2 of the final 3 (the third is yet to be developed).

Excuse the dust - the perspex I used to keep the neg flat was dustier than I thought. This was taken handheld with the D4, so more unsharp than the real neg. The contact print I took from these is far superior to these scans.

But, interested in comments on lighting.





The 'glow' is largely due to the yellow filter I used.

The final image is of the decaying flower.

Patrick, tulips have to be in colour, at least that's the way my feeble mind works.

ozimax wrote:Patrick, tulips have to be in colour, at least that's the way my feeble mind works.

1. These photos are for a B&W competition
2. I was only able to use B&W 4x5 film (given what I had on stock)
3. The tulip in all 3 forms (2 of which are shown here) offered the simplicity I was after.

Granted, the colours of the tulips were beautiful, but principally relating to point 1 above, they were shot in B&W.

Reschsmooth wrote:

ozimax wrote:Patrick, tulips have to be in colour, at least that's the way my feeble mind works.

1. These photos are for a B&W competition
2. I was only able to use B&W 4x5 film (given what I had on stock)
3. The tulip in all 3 forms (2 of which are shown here) offered the simplicity I was after.

Granted, the colours of the tulips were beautiful, but principally relating to point 1 above, they were shot in B&W.

Ah, I see. Point taken. Nice photos in any case. Using B&W film does make colour photography problematic...

I think the first has possibility but i find the one you posted with the leaf (bulb not flowered) more pleasing and balanced. Maybe flipping so space is on right might workfor this one- as we tend to look left to right due to how we read i guess.
In some ways B&W is just about tone and contrast- i wonder if either increasing contrast of the bulb, or coversely darkening the background (of the first for eg) to increase apparent contrast with the bulb might help. I thik this is a little too stark on the second image you posted but the first could move more that way with a darker background.
sounds like a good project and as you say with the 3 parts it is contributing to the whole- not just as a stand alone.
nice work!
robert

Thanks guys

Robert, I am having the negs drum-scanned at the moment, so once I have 'proper' files, I will work on the images to, firstly, attain consistent contrast and, secondly, have all three images present. I think you are right about the contrast in the first and will try to find the middle ground. I will also be applying some 'texture' to them and see where that takes me.