[Irma]

I have taken some pictures where the background takes an important part of the story expressed in the picture. I thought it would come in handy to learn a bit more about it, but in macro. I have made some tries this morning, and this is one of the best ones. What do you think about this?

Thanks

[Peted]

Love the contrast between the sharp drops and the background, outstanding.

[Petographer]

I think it's an awesome shot Irma. I personally might have cropped it to a portrait style but that's not to say yours isn't fine the way it is. Just preference.

[Irma]

Thanks for your comments, I am very happy you like it!

[shuttertalk]

Beautiful subject! The droplets are magnificent!

I would probably emphasise the colour of the foreground blades of grass to make it stand out more...

[Don Schaeffer]

Forgive me Irma. I had some time and I played around with your image.


accenting line edges


darkening, increasing contrast and sharpening

[EnglishBob]

Great image Irma, wonderful, pastel almost.

[Irma]

There is no problem Don

Thanks a lot for your comments

[Kombisaurus]

Wonderful subtlety and restraint Irma, and the repeated pattern of drops in the background works wonders.

As this is in the "critique" section however, I will try to offer some suggestions.
I really can't fault the background - the bokeh and pattern suit the dew drops and rest of the image perfectly, and the pastelly colour and contrast suit it to.

If it were an image of mine, I would look to perhaps work on the foreground. You have chosen a particular drop of water as the subject of this photo, so I would try to make that a bit more obvious.
I hope you don't mind, but I've taken your image and cropped it to give the drop added importance, added a bit of contrast (against my better judgement) and then added a fake lens flare to draw attention to that particular drop and make it seem special.



The crop does work in adding some emphasis on the drop, but at the expense of some of your lovely background pattern.
The contrast gives it a nice bright morning light, but at the expense of the lovely subtlety of the original.
And finally the lens flare. Well, I'm sure if the flare was in the original image as it appears here then it would be wonderful, but adding something like this to the image might be crossing that line between "fake" and "real" to you - so you might not appreciate it. Also you do lose a bit of that lovely detail in the bottom of the water drop.

So all my suggestions have drawbacks as well as advantages it seems. Which means apart from the above, I can't think of any other ways to improve the image
Great job.. and its great that you set yourself these little photography challenges. I try to do that too sometimes, and it is always really helpful to me I think.

[EnglishBob]

Off all the variations the only image that invokes the title to me, ?morning dew? is Irma's original. In the competitions I have been entering the way the title matches the image can and will affect your score.

The original has the soft colors and lighting of early morning light to me.

[Irma]

Thanks Kombi and Bob for your comments.

Adrian, I appreciate very much your comment/advice. I like very much what you did with the picture. It shows me how I have to enphazise my main subject even when the colors are not too contrasting. I like the crop as well. It makes it focus even more. As Colin said a portrait style would have been a good option as well. I am afraid of portrait format, I have to practice more, and see when one style is better than the other one. The light in the drop looks great, this detail has been added in my list of wishes next time I take a picture of a waterdrop Thanks again

Bob, this is an interesting topic you have brought up with your comment. A few months ago I had another personal challenge. It was a chess bord, with king and the queen in a checkmate position. The timer in the background and the overall environment was a snowy landscape. I entitled it "Chess a winter game". I posted it in a critique forum. Technically it was ok, not perfect because of the perspective of the timer but I got a "well done". The problem was the title... God! He destroyed my picture in just a few questions and sentences he wrote. He was totally right I must say. Then I learned how important is the title in a picture.

Irma

[Kombisaurus]

Hey Irma,

Glad I can be helpful. But please don't take my advice as anything you "have" to do... I'm just voicing the first thing that pops into my muddled head, and make no claims that what I say has any resemblence to fact

I agree that a portrait layout would probably suit the image really well too. And I'm a little puzzled as to why you have trouble with that format, as all you need to do is rotate the camera 90deg (or leave the camera where it is and rotate the universe 90deg). Is it that you have trouble mentally composing images in that format?

Oh, and the topic of titles has also interested me lately. I nearly posted a new thread on Titles last week when we were discussing the "Gods Canvas" photo of StudioJ's... but Bob raising the topic here in relation to your image finally motivated me to actually click on "new post".

So here it is.. the official thread for voicing opinions on naming your photos! Let's hear what you guys think is good and bad.

http://www.shuttertalk.com/forums/viewto...?pid=19675

Cheers
Adrian

[Irma]

Is it that you have trouble mentally composing images in that format?

Yes

What I have been doing after Colin's comment, is to take the same picture in both formats. Maybe with the time I get used to...

Thanks for the thread as well. I have some questions to make there...

[Petographer]

Is it that you have trouble mentally composing images in that format?

Yes

What I have been doing after Colin's comment, is to take the same picture in both formats. Maybe with the time I get used to...

Thanks for the thread as well. I have some questions to make there...

Most times I can't stand viewing images in portrait style but it may suit an image much better at times. I suppose it's the monitor size that ruins it for me as there isn't as much image to see in portrait style. Plus viewing the images and having to rotate them is a pain. I may crop an image in portrait that has been shot in landscape style merely for suitability but when I shoot in portrait it is mostly because I need more frame above and below the subject. The last shots I posted of Clio were actually shot in portrait but later cropped tighter. Also, whichever format you use will determine the focus on the main subject.