Technical: Canon EOS &D, 1/800 sec, f1.4, focal length 50
David used a 50mm focal length and f1.4 to get shallow depth of focus. I like the image composition. I’m unsure about the focus. Perhaps more depth of field would be in order here. It’s really a graphical image with angles and curves. Except for the stool, which is also graphically placed, the image almost looks like it was masked. I think that HDR processing might be an interesting thing to try here. For me, I wouldn’t have the patience to set up the tripod and so forth. So it’s just a thought on my part. And again, I appreciate David’s continuing contributions. He’s got some pretty sweet images.
Technical: No data. HDR manipulated
The focus across the image is done very well. The diagonal lines bring you across the image to the main flower. The blossoms that have not bloomed are distracting. Cousin David has great backlight on the main flower. I think that I would have preferred to focus on this flower. The backlight makes the petals translucent and this would have been a stronger image.
Technical: post process
Cousin David is doing his technical magic again. Out in the field where his experiments have some practical application, he’s trying different things on this scene. The point here is that everything is in focus – front to back. What the image lacks is a center of interest. It’s a busy photo – waterfall, tree to the left, and the stone marker all compete for the viewer’s attention. The tree is a bit overexposed and draws the eye. But the tree is probably least interesting. The waterfall is slightly overexposed on top and underexposed on the bottom. Technically, it’s a shot without too much fault. But it’s not a shot to keep. Try isolating one element.