Protective Peony

[Greg]

f/11.0, 1/400 ISO400, 43 mm

This was taken before I got my speedlite, so some of the petal areas are blown. My pressing question is, should I blur the background (leaves)? Leave the top layer of leaves in focus along with the flower? Don’t blur anything? Does the brightness and color contrast of the peony separate the flower from the BG enough?

 

[Dahlia Ambrose]

Hi Greg, blurring the leaves will make the flower stand out. In my opinion, the contrast looks good, maybe decrease the brightness slightly?

[3pco]

The three leaves on the left are a distraction. Darken and/or blur.

[Tobie]

Personally I’d blur it just a little and perhaps desaturate the greens just a touch.

[Greg]

Thanks for the comments so far. Here is the same photograph with the leaves in roughly the same focal plane as the flower left in focus. Next I plan to put up a version that has all the surrounding foliage blurred.

[Greg]

And, following, is the version with the entire foliage serving as blurred background. NOTE: the leaf at the center bottom is actually in front of the flower, and it seems unnatural to me — like a leaf-shaped, large notch cut out of the petal. Any suggestions on what to do about it or which of the three looks better to you would be appreciated.

[Greg]

P.S.  The first photo with no blurring has a more purplish cast to it than the other two. Please disregard this if you can.

[Anne Hornsby]

Hi, Greg.   I tried working with the image in PS to blur the leaves, but it seems that the flower was composited onto this background, in part beccause the light on the flower is so different than on the leaves, and in part from working in PS.    If this is the case, could you try a different background with light from the same direction, and make the flower less bright?

[Greg]

Anne,

I’m not sure why the light appears to be coming from two different directions, because this was one shot straight from the camera.

You might be seeing something odd-looking as a result of the AI Mask software I used. I remember choosing “composite” rather than “transparent,” or something to that effect. Have you had any experience with this software? It’s from Topaz.

I’ll have to learn how to add in a different background. Currently going through a set of lessons on Photoshop.

[Anne Hornsby]

@glegg  Hi, Greg.   No I’m not familiar with the Topaz products.   It takes more time than I have just to sort through Photoshop commands!  🙂    But I think your guess may be correct.  The flower just looks separate from the greenery.   If it were just the ISO 400  I would expect some extra brightness to be on leaves, too.

[Rob Wood (Admin)]

You’re getting some pretty harsh shadows from that speed light is the thing I would mainly be concerned about. But yeah, throwing the background out of focus with a shallow depth of field is a common strategy for flowers. 🙂

[Greg]

I did not use the speed light on this photo. I mentioned the speed light in an attempt at explaining why there are blown highlights and harsh shadows in it — this was taken before I had my speed light.

As for the common strategy of a shallow depth of field, I really botched the intro to this little exercise.  I meant to provide a series of three photos and ask which one looks the best. I just reread it, and I don’t know what I was talking about.

Got some good perspective, anyway.

[Rob Wood (Admin)]

Is it direct sunlight then?

[Greg]

Yes, direct sunlight as filtered through the foliage of the veritable rain forest Dad calls a flower garden. Also, if I remember correctly, the sun was low in the sky, just skimming some of the edges of the petals.

[Falxy]

Hi Greg……….looks like you have made it painterly………..really like it,would just clone out the red and brown lines/marks l/h side petals….but other than!! 🙂

One flower in your face equals a good mark for yourselve….well taken and no confusion with the subject!! 🙂

[Greg]

Thanks, Falxy.

[Ken Scheepers]

Hi Greg….. I’ve had a few images with similar background distractions and have had some luck using textures. I did a screen shot and applied a monochrome texture, replacing the background with 100% opacity and masked the flower. I used an inverted vignette to lighten the center slightly as well. It’s not a perfect mask but it provides a different perspective!

[Greg]

Oh, my, that’s a very interesting direction to go. Another reason to strengthen my paltry knowledge of Photoshop. Thanks for the different perspective!

[Frank]

Nicely done, Ken, but I prefer seeing the blurred leaves since it gives a hint of the environment.  Here I darkened the exposure a bit, hoping to take out a bit of the harsh light on this beautiful flower.  In the NIK Collection of software, there is Viveza 2.   You can make a “control point”, a circle of any size that you can place anywhere in an image.  With flowers like this, you can put it right over the center.  There are sliders that effect exposure, add structure, saturation and other effects.  It acts ike an adjustment brush in ACR and Lightroom.

I used it here to darken the center a bit to deepen the color.  In most cases one might actually boost the exposure to help draw our eyes to the subject.

[Greg]

I’ll look into that software. Sounds very useful to me. I liked the bit about the non-intuitive darkening of this photo.

Thanks, Frank.

[Frank]

PS:  For anyone with extra space in your yard or garden, plant a peony!  With absolutely no care they bloom like crazy, die out disappear for the winter, and come back each spring full of more blooms.  As Greg has shown here, they make wonderful subjects to photograph. (I live in New England, USA)

[Greg]

I agree wholeheartedly. There are many varieties of peonies — some look like dreadlocks made of cotton strips, others have incredibly delicate petals that are hard for me to photograph; they’re practically translucent. I’m in Central Illinois, USA.

BTW, get the “tree” peony. It has sturdy twigs and won’t fall over like the “bush” variety.

 

[Ken Scheepers]

I agree Frank, I’ve got two down here in Texas. One burgundy and the other is white/pink.

[Author]

Posts