Sunburst

[Ed Vatza]

Folks, I really need your thoughts on this one. I'm not sure what to make of it. To me it looks like "digital art" moreso that a digital image but this is pretty much straight out of the camera.

I cropped to an 8x10 and centered it on purpose. I boosted the highlights some. And I adjusted the Clarity and Vibrance in Lightroom like I do for most images. I dumped it into PS4 where I removed some blemishes and dust spots before doing some sharpening and noise reduction.

The image which seems painterly to me is purely a result of working with the light. There was late day sunlight streaming in from the left and my wife standing with a gold reflector to the right. In addition, I used some fill flash from the front. This is the result.

Image made with a Canon 30D with remote shutter release; Sigma 150mm Macro lens; Canon 430 EX Flash w/ LumiQuest Softbox mounted on a flexible flash bracket; tripod-mounted with a Novoflex Focusing Rail; Gold Reflector held by my wife and flower steadied with a McClamp.

1/60 sec @ f/16; ISO 800; -1 EV; FEC -1

Please let me know your thoughts - good, bad or indifferent. Thanks.

[Don Lacy]

I really like the composition and the lighting the petals look like there illuminated, I would lighten the brown center to pull ,out a bit more detail and would also be tempted to remove the bud or stem peaking out in the URC.

[Ed Vatza]

Thanks, Don. I tend to like the darker center but see your point. Here is a version with the center lightened a bit more.

[Keith Carver]

Love the comp and lighting, Ed. Centering works well in this case. I like the center purplish colors in the second post better than the first. There are two small mildly distracting background bluish areas (2 o'clock, 6:30 o'clock) that you might clone out - see how it looks.

[Richard Lovison]

Ed,

I like it as presented with the darker middle due to the added drama and I can still discern detail in spite of the darkness. Critiquing off a monitor has its limitations and probably what is more important is how much detail you get in the final print.

The centering of the flower works for me though the bit of stem or whatever in the URC disturbs the symmetry.

I have had the same "painterly" effect that you have in the petals occur in the leaves of trees in a landscape when the intensity of the light is very strong. Detail gets lost and clusters of leaves become blobs of light.

Well done Ed.

[Julie Kenward]

I totally agree with the others. I think the painterly feel of the lighting in this image adds to it - it really gives it a three dimensional feel. I would clone out the two spots in the BG (small leaf and stem I believe) as this is all about the flower head. I could go with either the top post or the repost but I do like that there is more detail in the bottom image. Very nicely done, Ed!

[Ed Vatza]

Keith, Richard, Jules,

Thanks for the feedback. Here we go one more time. I cloned out the leaf and stem.

Interestingly Richard, the light was not all that strong. First off, it wasn't too long before sunset and the sunlight was filtering through some trees also on the left. No doubt the reflector and the fill flash acted to enhance the light. The other element that contributed to the 3-D effect that Jules mentioned is that on this particular flower, each and every petal was curved or rolled at the edges. I think that also heightened the effect.

[Ed Cordes]

I like the colors in the first post, but agree that the extra stuff you cloned out needed to go.

[Daniel Cadieux]

Nice comp Ed. I like the cleanliness of the final repost with the removal of the extra stuff. As far as the brown centre I would prefer something in between the two - but bordering closer to the original.