Blooming Today - Orchid Board

goodgollymissmolly · #1 03-31-2008, 01:41 PM

It is truly an ugly, cold, rainy day, but in the GH the plants below and 35 others are blooming. It makes the terrible weather easier to ignore. Maybe I got these attachments correctly done.

If so, the first is C. mossiae
2nd Phal equestris
Phal stuartiana

These are done with a Nikon D200 and a Nikon 105mm VR macro for pic 1 and a Nikon 60mm macro for the other two. All three pictures use 3 flashes.

Ross · #2 03-31-2008, 01:53 PM

Looking good. Are you shooting NEF? If so, the images are approx 1/3-2/3 EV underexposed. Just thought you might like to know. Also you could use D-Lighting to brighten up the existing exposures. If you shot jpeg, then you see what you get. Nice focus, by the way.

camille1585 · #3 03-31-2008, 01:56 PM

Beautiful orchid and beautiful pics, I love them!! Good job

goodgollymissmolly · #4 03-31-2008, 03:06 PM

Yes, they are NEF's originally, but I use levels and curves to lighten them a little before converting to JPEG's. They are also shot at low contrast and moderate saturation to preserve highlight detail. I hate 255 pixels, but I also stretch the result to get as long a histogram as possible to utilize the full tonal range available. I usually leave the contrast low and that might be making you think they're too dark. The other thing that I hate is that when you reduce the file sizes for posting they lose their pop. Printed at 20x30 these pictures make people involuntarily go WOW!

And you are right...Nikon chooses to underexpose and under saturate, and under contrast to save the photographer from himself.

Most are at f/16 so the focus isn't too critical. I used to shoot at wider apertures, but I got convinced that macro shots of orchids look better with longer depth of field. I guess there is room for different opinions on that.

I know you dislike black backgrounds, but I'm partial to black, white, or 18% gray because I can use the background as a tone correction using the black,white or gray control points.

Now if I can just get a D3.................

Ross · #5 03-31-2008, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goodgollymissmolly

Yes, they are NEF's originally, but I use levels and curves to lighten them a little before converting to JPEG's. They are also shot at low contrast and moderate saturation to preserve highlight detail. I hate 255 pixels, but I also stretch the result to get as long a histogram as possible to utilize the full tonal range available. I usually leave the contrast low and that might be making you think they're too dark. The other thing that I hate is that when you reduce the file sizes for posting they lose their pop. Printed at 20x30 these pictures make people involuntarily go WOW!

And you are right...Nikon chooses to underexpose and under saturate, and under contrast to save the photographer from himself.

Most are at f/16 so the focus isn't too critical. I used to shoot at wider apertures, but I got convinced that macro shots of orchids look better with longer depth of field. I guess there is room for different opinions on that.

I know you dislike black backgrounds, but I'm partial to black, white, or 18% gray because I can use the background as a tone correction using the black,white or gray control points.

Now if I can just get a D3.................

I agree with everything you say except the first part. My findings with the D200 shot under 5000K CF lights is that it tends to blow out the whites and, like you say, underexpose the rest. Just humor me and try the same exposures with D-lighting to see what CaptureNX does for you. I find it surprizing at times and dismal other times. If you do use levels, then adjust each channel seperately then adjust the composite last. Just a few pointers from a long time Nikon Cature fan.

goodgollymissmolly · #6 03-31-2008, 03:33 PM

Ross ,here is the same picture with all Levels and Curves corrections turned off. All Black Point, and Unsharp Mask settings as before. D Lighting applied with 50% Adjustment and 50% Color Boost.

I have no idea how it will appear on the forum, but it is less saturated in the petals ans sepals as I expected. It is brighter overall, but the petal color in the first picture is correct and I'm betting this one is too light colored (it is on my screen). I hate to make 70kB files out of my pictures but here goes.

By the way...the original picture is not at all dark before reducing the file size. It is just right....with the L&C adjustment in place.

I've had Capture since the beginning with my D100. I do like it and have been to two Nikon Schools on it. NX is a big improvement over the first stuff.

Here goes

kavanaru · #7 03-31-2008, 03:37 PM

Congrats! Gorgeous Phal. stuartiana! and the C. mosiae is also a very nice clon.

Ross · #8 03-31-2008, 03:40 PM

Much better! My monitor is color-calibrated. Is yours? If not, then Windows might be the culprit. This second photo appears "spot-on" on my calibrated LaCie Electron Blue 19" color calibrated and controlled monitor. Just to give you some (hopefully constructive) feedback. Take it for what it's worth, maybe 2 cents?

By the way, I do see the subtle colorations and the nice light lavender on my monitor. I actually like the second image a lot better, because it is crisp, the colors appear accurate and the brightness is good. Has nothing to do with the background. Hope you take this for what it is worth.

goodgollymissmolly · #9 03-31-2008, 03:51 PM

Yep Ross, my monitor is calibrated, but it ain't no LaCie Blue. However I do have an advantage because I have the flower here to look at.

Thanks Kav, the stuartiana is my wife's plant and it is a good one. I mistakenly bought the same plant twice from the same source and both are blooming and identical. The equestris is outstanding. It's from a good quality cross. I have another from a common cross and source and it doesn't compare. The difference is unbelievable.

The mossiae was a good clone suppposedly and I'm happy with it (this is it's first bloom for me though it had bloomed before and was bought as a large plant).

Ross, I never adjust the individual color channels in Levels, only the RGB (luminance)channel. I can mess up a picture in the blink of an eye by adjusting the individual channels. I gave up on that.

I have an outstanding C. walkeriana alba blooming now also, but for the reasons Ross and I have been discussing I can not get a picture that does it justice. If I get it white enough it loses detail in the white (which is all of the flower). Bummer

Ross · #10 03-31-2008, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goodgollymissmolly

I have an outstanding C. walkeriana alba blooming now also, but for the reasons Ross and I have been discussing I can not get a picture that does it justice. If I get it white enough it loses detail in the white (which is all of the flower). Bummer

A hint: underexpose the image from the camera about -.7 EV. Then in Capture select the D-lighting default (not advanced.) You might be suprized at the results. Also for pure white flowers (or flowers with mostly white) try cross lighting setup to emphasize the shadows. Then do the above. Something like this one

Not the best image in the world, but the image gets across the structure of the flower, which is pure whites.