Some of my personal problems

[pecunium]

With pictures.

I like birds of paradise, both of them, the birds, and the flowers, but the birds aren't endemic to where I live. Funny story (as I digress), back in the 9th grade we had to write a story, which our instructor (freshman English... someday I ought to compare the high school I went to in the poor part of town, to the one I went to in the wealthier suburbs), was going to send out to a friend of his.

The idea was for us to get a feel for the ways in which different audiences would approach our writing. I got it back with some interesting red-pencil. The other instructor didn't like some of my word choices (the one I recall was foray, I was talking about a trip to the zoo; and had [as I recall, almost 30 years later] divided the day into segments. She thought it 1: too military, and 2: archaic; some mention was made of castles; and made me think of sally ports. I always was a strange,and over-educated, child).

She also didn't like my referring to birds of paradise as animals. They were only (she stressed this) plants. I took a couple of lessons from this, not all of them as intended, but back to the flowers.

I like birds of paradise. They are such a contrast. A dull heap of leaves, aggressive, and often drab; unless carefully maintained the interior will be a mixed mass of live and dead leaves.

Then there is the flower. A proud,and garish, beak. Fleshy in it's appearance, the green point splitting open to reveal the waxy gleam of the orange petals, which fling themselves back before stabbing forth wit that blue-purple tongue.

Somehow I can't seem to manage isolating out the essence of them. I'm getting better, but there is something missing still.

This one is somehow too busy. I can't tell if it's the confusion of the petals, or the way the repeating elements of the leaves parallel the petals and so diminish them.

Dragon's Headdress



This one is a bit better. The leaf in the background isn't too distracting, but it would still be better without it. It could also use a bit more negative space in the top. All in all it's not a bad documentary shot, but it's not really art. I think the problem is the side view is too much a flat presentation. The lines don't move much. The first manages to do that some.

Finery


All in all, as I look at this to explain them, what I see is a lack of the sense of motion they have in life. I need to find a way to catch the active lines of the flowers, without losing it in the busyness which so garish a display makes it all to easy to either get lost in, or run too hard from (none, and I mean none, of the serious close ups I've attempted has been worth a bucket of warm spit).

Then there are the amaryllis. I think I understand them.

Powder Puffs


Finery

Comments

[soul-diaspora.livejournal.com]

Beautiful. "Finery" is less cluttered but I find the lighting/contrast of "Dragon's Headdress" more dramatic somehow.

[don-fitch.livejournal.com]

In the interest of Fannish (or maybe Botanical, or Horticultural) Quibbling, I have to mention that the red flower looks more like a Hippeastrum. (Mind you, they're closely related to the actual Amaryllis, with "amaryllis" being the common name for both of them, and you do use the common name for Strelitzia (which is more confusing because there are several very different plants commonly called "Bird of Paradise").

But yeah, the first photo might've been better if a couple of errant cowlick petals had been brushed back -- as you say, it seems a bit busy & confused (and the almost-white spot just above it adds to the clutter).

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Yay for geekery. What I know is what the flower looks like. I've been lazy of late, and not been looking up the latin names for things I've been posting. The white, well I could have had someone stand behind it with a dark cloth, but that's the sort of thing I have trouble with when shooting these.

More practice.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

I like the thrust of it, and the counterintuitive downward aspects of the rising flower.

[barelyproper.livejournal.com]

Curiosity question... Have you tried shooting them from below? Birds of Paradise are a little vain and might respond well. (yes I have to anthropomorpise them, otherwise they show me disdain)

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

I'll put it on the list. I shot a dozen or so today, but they were all from above, as they were just splitting open, nothing but a streak of waxy orange and white.

[vanmojo.livejournal.com]

Hey TK...

Question: How do you get those great vibrant colors? I mean, I know you tend to favor bright colorful subjects, but it looks like you might be using something like special filters, film, darkroom technique or shooting technique to get that exquisite brilliance from your color (particularly on that first one...)

[antonia-tiger.livejournal.com]

I don't recall when I first heard of Birds of Psradise. but I think it was part of a big book about animals, partly tied in with Darwin's voyage, big on the ideas of evolution, and still referring to "land bridges" between continents.

And now I learn that the label is used for some plants as well.

[kd5mdk.livejournal.com]

I thought Birds of Paradise were a part of the Muslin company.

[jaebi-lit.livejournal.com]

what I see is a lack of the sense of motion they have in life.

That's interesting -- when I first saw the second picture, the side-on one, I thought that the flower looked like it was leaping right off the stem!

[starcat-jewel.livejournal.com]

Looking at the first picture sans glasses (because my eyes are tired) gives the impression of a flame-haired fairy in full wing. If you wanted to play with digital manipulation, that might be a direction to take with that image.

[skylarker.livejournal.com]

The first Bird of Paradise photo makes me want to turn the flower to angle the 'beak' slightly toward the viewer. I see a lot of motion in the second shot, like a hunting dog on point.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

I do use some "darkroom" technique. But not much. For the first image I increased the overall saturation (the "purity" of the colors) a wee bit. I also burned in the side of the flower's "beak" because it was a bit too dark.

Mostly what I do is look for strong contrasts (e.g. the orange and green) and count on that to make things pop a bit. I have some new ones where the images actually seem a little flat to me, and I had to play a little more (mostly with dodging and burning, which digital makes easier to do), to get them closer to what I think they actually look like.