| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Harold Gough
Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5716
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 2:47 am Post subject: Clematis alpina Ocean Pearl New Images Added |
 |
|
The alpina group of Clematis, and varieties thereof, are some of the first to flower.
This flower, planted last year and flowering for the first time, caught me out. I was trying to get the stamens and stigma sharp but couldn't and the stuctures looked rather fuzzy. The first image was where I struggled, the second, a couple of hours later gave a hint as to the reason and the third, 24 hours later, gave the answer:
All with Olympus EP-2 and Olympus ED 4/3 35mm f3.5 macro, hand-held, overcast lighting.
1/60 f6.3 ISO 400
1/30 f10 ISO 800
1/40 f10 ISO 800
The answer is that it was a double flower. Many Clematis varieties/cultivars produce double flowers in the spring and single ones in the late summer/autumn.
Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.
My manual flash setup for high magnification:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843
Last edited by Harold Gough on Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:28 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ChrisR
Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 3036
Location: Near London, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Have you tried stacking yet, Howard? Even 2-3 shots make a big difference when you're trying to cover something like a flower.
The last image comes up nicely with Unsharp Mask, by the way.
Assuming that was handheld, the IS is working! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Gough
Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5716
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ChrisR wrote: | Have you tried stacking yet, Howard? Even 2-3 shots make a big difference when you're trying to cover something like a flower.
The last image comes up nicely with Unsharp Mask, by the way.
Assuming that was handheld, the IS is working! |
Chris, stacking is:
a) out of the question for some time yet. I'm horrified at the time every part of digital photography takes, compared with using film
b) not possible in this case as the flower was swinging around a lot in the breeze and I had to wait for moments when it was fairly immobile
c) I was using one hand to help immobilise the flower
d) not going to happen until I get software
Unsharp mask (I have Photoshop) seems a good thing to try. All so far has been in Olympus Master 2.
Edit: I've had a quick go with unsharp mask and apparently got nowhere.
Anyway, I have replaced the original image with the one put through unsharp mask.
Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.
My manual flash setup for high magnification:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChrisR
Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 3036
Location: Near London, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ha!
Handheld stacking is easier than I thought it was going to be. The software lines things up remarkably well.
You can even use a motorwinder/drive with flash and sort of drift slowly towards your subject, holding it in the other hand.
The recentish Photoshops have a stacking ability, worth a try. The instructions are designed for the partially psychic, but there are Utube videos by the dozen.
That sharpened image looks better I think.
Why is digital taking longer?! Perhaps it's the temptation to do things that you wouldn't have been able to do at all with fiim 
I remember (with fatigue!) how long it took to produce a decent colour print in the darkroom, even with the paper processor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Gough
Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5716
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ChrisR wrote: |
Why is digital taking longer?! Perhaps it's the temptation to do things that you wouldn't have been able to do at all with fiim
I remember (with fatigue!) how long it took to produce a decent colour print in the darkroom, even with the paper processor. |
With film, I compose and focus, having any necessary filtration in place. As I use only reversal film, what more is there to do, apart from to post the films from a few week's work to the lab?
Many film users changed to digitaL and went back to film, for just such reasons, and don't get me started on storage/security of digital images.
Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.
My manual flash setup for high magnification:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChrisR
Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 3036
Location: Near London, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | With film, I compose and focus, having any necessary filtration in place. As I use only reversal film, what more is there to do, apart from to post the films from a few week's work to the lab? |
I reckon I could have uploaded the card to the computer and internet for printing/storage quicker than I could get to the post box.
We take our pics and have the results pretty well immediately.
Imagine if someone were to suggest that it would be quicker to save the cards up, and post them off somewhere and wait, before seeing the results. 
Last edited by ChrisR on Sun Apr 03, 2011 6:27 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 12561
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Admit it Harold, you're a grumpy dinosaur! |
Ahem...
I understand you're jesting, but this may not be evident to everyone, and I'd really like to keep this board running on a "friendly and collegial" basis.
Let's have no name-calling, even when you don't mean it. 
--Rik |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Gough
Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5716
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChrisR wrote: | | Quote: | | With film, I compose and focus, having any necessary filtration in place. As I use only reversal film, what more is there to do, apart from to post the films from a few week's work to the lab? |
I reckon I could have uploaded the card to the computer and internet for printing/storage quicker than I could get to the post box.
We take our pics and have the results pretty well immediately.
Imagine if someone were to suggest that it would be quicker to save the cards up, and post them off somewhere and wait, before seeing the results. |
I was not refering to speed of being able to view the results but to time invested. Yes, there have been times when I used a lab for same-day processing but that was when I was learning to use new camera bodies/lenses/flash guns. With film it's a matter of confidence in your own ability. (I almost never bracket).
Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.
My manual flash setup for high magnification:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Gough
Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5716
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Harold Gough wrote: | | don't get me started on storage/security of digital images. |
When I wrote that remark I was in constant worry about my PC failing fatally. When switched on it would get stuck in a loop, not sending a signal to the monitor and I had to keep resetting to break the lopp. I have now found a cure, which is due to buildup of static somewhere on the motherboard.
This PC has a slave HDD which was previously a C Drive from which I was permanently locked out by software failure (I could not access Windows and still cannot, except the folder system). I can now access my files but I was without them for many months.
Having recently had an overheating problem, which I have cured by relocation a fan, I have been told that the CPU fitted has a reputation for catching fire and taking everything with it.
My wife had many of her holiday digital shots corrupted when a card reader failed to shut down properly before being removed. I had to purchase recovery software to get them back.
None of the above happens to film.
And before someone reminds me of the wonder of back-ups: I know someone whose photographic website was maliciously, and fatally, hacked. It had been backed up every night. Sadly, the fatal malware was backed up too.
Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.
My manual flash setup for high magnification:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Gough
Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5716
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rjlittlefield wrote: | | Quote: | | Admit it Harold, you're a grumpy dinosaur! |
Ahem...
I understand you're jesting, but this may not be evident to everyone, and I'd really like to keep this board running on a "friendly and collegial" basis.
Let's have no name-calling, even when you don't mean it.
--Rik |
Well, the dinosaurs were very successfull for some 160 millions years without being displaced by a radically new form of life! And they left some of the most interesting and aesthetically fascinating records. 
Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.
My manual flash setup for high magnification:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChrisR
Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 3036
Location: Near London, UK
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 2:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Stuff happens to film!
I can remember losing about 200 clients' films when an E6 processor thermostat failed, and about 40 of my own in an Indian airport hand-baggage scanner, and Kodachrome going a sort of purple in the Namib desert despite being kept in a cool bag all the time.
And how many times were the whole rolls spoiled by scratches in the light trap?
Seriously I think once you get your workflow sorted out you'll feel a little differently. There are times when I'd like to use film, but the extra effort required gets in the way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Gough
Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5716
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 3:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chris,
I will be using both on the same shoots, with duplication of the most vital shots.
I have just had my processing of the latest digital images, prior to posting, disrupted. A telephone call from my young nephew's school said he had been sick, and his parents could not be contacted, so would I collect him. He will be here, at my house the rest of today and, due to the rules excluding a sick child for 48 hours, potentially here for at least two more days. It remains to be seen how much time I will spend on images.
Incidentally, we have DVDs and cable TV but the option (his choice) keeping him amused right now is on VHS. 
The first post was collected half an hour ago, and the turnaround at the lab is 48 hours, so it might, theoretically, be a close thing this time!
Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.
My manual flash setup for high magnification:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Gough
Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5716
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
A last look, at least until seeds have set:
These flowers were on the north side of the supporting tree, the background being its trunk, which the camera tecnology makes very dark in close-up.
Olympus EP-2, Olympus Zuiko 35mm ED 4/3 f3.5 macro. shot around noon BST.
Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.
My manual flash setup for high magnification:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Gough
Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5716
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
A year after taking the original pictures I have an Elmarit 60mm macro lens and Topaz image processing software. So I took some new shots today:
A fairly ordinary flower portrait, nice colours and textures and some hint of foliage:
Pretensions to being a Rembrandt? I did nothing special to get this effect. The light did it. Lots of foliage and a well-lit background:
Its best side? The trunk of the cherry tree up which it was climbing gives a dark background:
I had been concerned that I was needing to point the lens towards the sun and flare had been starting to show at the edges of the viewfinder. Then this happened and I shot in profile:
All hand-held, ISO 400, 1/30, 1/25, 1/15 & 1/50 sec, respectively, all f11.
Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.
My manual flash setup for high magnification:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
