Rose (C&C)

Shrimp · 01-08-2006 8:20pm #1

Rose

Work-flow:
Selective Blur
Curves
Colourise
Dodge/Burn
Sharpen

Thank You!

01-08-2006 8:40pm

It looks like a cabage ,if i handed that to a girl shed probably ask me where the spudz were.

Zillah · 01-08-2006 9:03pm

Cabbage. Way too green. Roses are beautiful colourful flowers, reducing them to a greenish black and white seems like a bad idea.

Ruu_Old · 01-08-2006 9:10pm

I would have to agree with the above two posts, wheres the love gone?:(

rymus · 01-08-2006 9:13pm

I agree with the above three posts... Also the extra detail around the top and right side of the photo is distrating the attention away from the cabbage.

CONMIKE12 · 01-08-2006 9:27pm

I actually like this shot.It seems to me that there are droplets of water actaully hitting the rose as it was shot and i like stuff like that.Also,tis a nice deviation from colourful and everyday images of roses.Nice to see an unusual take on this flower.Good work here Shrimp.

01-08-2006 9:52pm

I like floral shots most of the time ,I like their delicacy .
But I think this shot is Fat and there is far too many droplets to create any real impact. I think a classic rose shot would be a petal actually bending with one rain drop creating force on it.

it's probably just me though .

Zillah · 01-08-2006 10:18pm

I do like the textures. Its just the colouring thats putting me off.

Shrimp · 02-08-2006 12:10am

The rose looks like a cabbage, whats your point? That's hardly my doing.

I get the impression that once it's a floral shot, it has to be typical... such as.. "a petal actually bending with one rain drop creating force on it"

If i was too follow that advice and never try anything new, then I'd never go anywhere, right?

Thanks for the comments all the same.

Goodshape · 02-08-2006 12:36am

Shrimp wrote:

The rose looks like a cabbage, whats your point? That's hardly my doing.

How isn't it your doing? You took the shot (I assume) and then also altered the colours and saturation.

I quite like it anyway, but have to agree it would probably look better if it actually looked like a rose (I think the background as is with a red tint to the rose itself could be great).

Anyway, yea, experimenting is good. Keep it up.

JackKelly · 02-08-2006 1:15am

Shrimp wrote:

The rose looks like a cabbage, whats your point? That's hardly my doing.

The point is, you took a photo of a rose which now looks like a cabbage mainly due to the colour and saturation you've put to it. It's entirely your doing.

Shrimp wrote:

I get the impression that once it's a floral shot, it has to be typical... such as.. "a petal actually bending with one rain drop creating force on it"

If i was too follow that advice and never try anything new, then I'd never go anywhere, right?

I'd hardly call that new. It's a head-on photo of your average rose with some PP.

p.s. lmao at "work-flow". That's almost as annoying as "blog"

When are you going to get over yourself?

p.s. lmao at "work-flow". Thats almost as annoying as "blog" or even "podcast"

Shrimp · 02-08-2006 1:18am

There's no need to be such a knob timay.. I'm saying it's something new for me.. clearly it's not something new to everyone, don't be so picky and petty..

Zillah · 02-08-2006 5:06am

Shrimp wrote:

The rose looks like a cabbage, whats your point? That's hardly my doing.

I doubt it looked like a cabbage until you took a photo of it. The main point is that your processing has made it look weird. I like the drops and the texture, the colouring ruins it.

Metacortex · 02-08-2006 5:17am

I have to agree with everyone else. The colouring really takes away from the image

BrookieD · 02-08-2006 7:10am

i like the shot, its a different take on a well used shot. good effort there.

Heres my effort, I think shrimp as a little more rawness to it.

aFlabbyPanda · 02-08-2006 7:42am

I actually quite like it. (but I'm not a huge fan of excessive use of PP).

elven · 02-08-2006 8:10am

I can appreciate that you wouldn't want to produce something that looks like all the millions of other rose shots out there. And I'm not going to say that you should have done it differently for the sake of making it fit in with *my* idea of a beautiful rose picture. But there is a reason that when people see a rose, they want to portray it as something velvety, soft and beautiful, because when you look at one that's what qualities are generally attractive about it. It might help to tell us what you were aiming for, if it wasn't that, and it would be easier to give a more considered critique of the photo itself (although having said that, I am also inclined to point out that a picture shouldn't need an explanation). As it stands, I think you've taken a picture that isn't particularly strong and been pretty heavy handed with the PS - there's lots of banding/posterisation (or whatever you call it) where the tones merge and it also looks like it's oversharpened or something - there's white lines at the edges of the petals - overall there's just too much going on to really appreciate the subject without being distracted by the contrast. I know it's probably a cliche to have it on a black background but those strong white areas in the background just make it very difficult to let your eye travel over the entire frame, and mostly the subject, without being distracted.

I think it would help if you did explain what you were attempting to do, to see if there's maybe a better way.

440Hz · 02-08-2006 8:48am

IMO - this is a *nice* shot. Nice in that the subject is something pretty and some of your treatment of the shot is great. I really really like the light that falls on the droplets, and I think that perhaps in this case the tones you have applied have accentuated the drops. However I do think the tones take from the overall beauty of the shot. I cant quite put my finger on what it is, I like the tones but I feel the shot lacks a beauty or elegance (which is being lost) with the tones you are using. Having said that, it is great to see a new take on 'just another rose' shot, and experimentation is great. I understand and admore what you were aiming for but think that in this case the shot is just nice but could have been really beautiful. Having said that I would hate to see a big red cabbage in this shot too!! Subtlety is required, but I think this is just a little *too* subtle

Fionn · 02-08-2006 10:39am

certainly isn't the clichéd shot i've taken and doubtless thousands of others

so in that sense i'd have to say it's pretty unique.

just the centre seems to be in focus - is this intentional? the image manipulation thats been done may seem excessive to some but thats a personal preference i guess.
something about the composition doesn't appeal to me but i'm not sure what it is, i'm guessing the rule of thirds might be it i dunno

anyway keep experimenting

Oriel · 02-08-2006 12:42pm

Shrimp wrote:

Thanks for the comments all the same.

That was the comment i enjoyed the most. It's as if to say "I was expecting comments, but thanks all the same for your crappy attempt at comments".

I'm not going to bother commenting on the photo, as I think everything has been said already.
Shrimp, a word of advice - I really don't want to know what has been done to a photograph after it has been taken. If I want to know, I will ask.
You're better off putting the camera/lense/focal length etc there instead - to help others.

S.

Tarakiwa · 02-08-2006 1:09pm

You may / may not be aware that I am new to this forum / photography in general but I am going to go out on a bit of a limb here & say that I find some aspects of this shot to be nice.
In fact, overall I enjoyed this photograph. I agree that there has been a bit too much post production work done on it but it is still a nice shot.

I like that it is a bit different!

As I say - I am new to all of this so maybe my opinion is not as valid as those of the experienced photographers out there .......... then again, maybe my inexperience makes it more valid .............

Oriel · 02-08-2006 1:43pm

Tarakiwa wrote:

I am new to this forum...but I am going to go out on a bit of a limb here

You're not going out on a limb at all! Your opinion is just as vaild as everybody elses here! (Except Shrimp's of course

)

S.

Shrimp · 02-08-2006 1:48pm

Thanks for all the replies, waether they be short or long.

I have outlined what work I've done to the photo in the first post under the image. I dont think I over worked the image, but I think that the reletivly tight square crop may give the sense of been cramped. Perhaps a shot from a bit more of a distance might reduce the appearence of the post processing.

---

Sinecurea - "I really don't want to know what has been done to a photograph after it has been taken. If I want to know, I will ask."

I posted that info under that photo because it's almost garrenteed that people will want to know what was dont to the orginal image.

---

"I was expecting comments, but thanks all the same for your crappy attempt at comments"

I said "Thanks for the comments all the same".. I said that to show that even though the comments were mixed, I apprciate them all. There's no need to be so childish.

Morlar · 02-08-2006 2:08pm

I am not a big fan of the processing on this picture but think its worthwhile trying things out from time to time and experimenting rather than churning out standard 'technically correct' and boring pictures. A lot of people seem to find a way to take a reasonable photograph and endlessly reproduce that same picture and thats just boring so fair play for trying something different even if in this example I dont think it was successful.

My take on this one is that the main problem with this picture is the colouring achieved in the processing - heres an example of a rose with different colour processing which I think is a much stronger example of taking a non-standard approach :

http://www.deviantart.com/view/31370991/

Rose (C&C)

Comments