I've been on a hike earlier today and I noted there is plenty of mushrooms around and gave photographing them a go. I used the built in flash of the d7000 and the 35mm 1.8g lens and a paper handkerchief as a "softbox".
This is a first of many more ordinary white poisonous mushrooms to come :-)
[closed]
PHOTO-A-DAY: October 2012
(823 posts) (72 voices)-
Posted 7 months ago #
-
Gabb, love that mushroom. I've got one I shot a few years back that I'll have to post one day.
This was shot in the Maroon Creek Wilderness, outside of Aspen, CO. A little structure and contrast added in Silver Efex. Cropped slightly to get the dimensions I wanted.
D90 17-35 @ f/5.6 25mm 1/50 ISO 400.Posted 7 months ago # -
Thanks rx4. I was actually counting a bit the other day and came to the conclusion that the cost for all the gear used in these shots comes in at under 2500 usd. That's including camera, lens, light stands, shower drape hanger (essential tool), everything. I tell my wife it's very cheap but she doesn't quite agree. Luckily the results help me convince her to let me spend even more :p
Posted 7 months ago # -
Gabb, nice mushroom capture. My guideline is, when out on a walk with bad light, focus on the ground, its amazing what one can find.
Proudgeek, great composition and attention to line. I have been trying to build a similar composition, but am not there yet.Posted 7 months ago # -
proudgeek: Know what I would like to see in this photo? An Appaloosa horse or two standing among the trees. That would really make you look twice!
Posted 7 months ago # -
@ proudgeek I certainly cannot argue with donald about the addition of some form....however, the photo as I view it is an exceptional image with the "rhythm" of the trees and such a nice repeating pattern...
And, that mushroom... just like it is ready to be grabbed by someone who is unknowing...
Posted 7 months ago # -
No horses were available, although there was a juvenile moose about 500 yards down the trail. Couldn't coax him into this glade. Maybe I should have stuck my wife out there in the trees somewhere.
Posted 7 months ago # -
-
There may be a few more of the Bitterroot River coming this fall:
Posted 7 months ago # -
Proudgeek, love that forest. No Subject needed imho.
Posted 7 months ago # -
-
proudgeek: No, no wife. I am not just talking about any form; just one specific form would give the photo more interest. The Appaloosa horse came from the Nez Perce Indian Tribe. They are white/gray with black/dark gray spots; an exact complement to Aspen tree trunks. Hence, my comment that such a horse would be perfectly camouflaged by the Aspen trunks until you looked twice and could pick out the form of the horse. This is the difference between amateurs like us who shoot what we find and pro's like Joe McNally shooting for a Nikon Brochure. Nikon would have paid to rent an Appaloosa or two to place among the Aspen trunks. I was just making a comment for purposes of sharing something in my head that could be done to make a good photo an exceptional photo. I was not suggesting you, or any of us here, should have done this. We don't have the funds to "set up" our shoots like a pro shooting for a corporate client has. Here is an example of what they can do; which we cannot. My comment was not a criticism of your photo; just a comment for people to think about.
Posted 7 months ago # -
I understand. A zebra would have been REALLY cool, because you would have matched both pattern and color, but yes, sometimes you've got to play the hand you're dealt.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Donaldjose and ProudGeek,
This is an interesting exchange, and underlying it is a philosophy and an ethic about natural landscape photography. Let me first say ProudGeek is that I really like your composition and the focus on lines in the image. It reminds me of one of Ansel Adams' most famous images. of course, having an element of contrast in the image might have made it more interesting to some, but that may have been a different story. Here the story appears to be about nature and the lines it creates, and how a black and white treatment can help tell this story.
In terms of what Pros do, that would seem to me to be the purpose of the professional photographer's assignment. If one desires or has been tasked with creating a compelling image that communicated a particular message, then placing an object may be appropriate. However, please understand that capturing images is only a hobby for me, so I could be wrong. Putting something into an image may or may not be part of one's photographic ethic--not that doing one thing is better ethically than another.
So I interpret this all as the intersection of what one's story is to tell through a particular image intersecting with some kind of ethical framework. Liked both of your comments.
Now, I need to stop writing and start capturing images!
Posted 7 months ago # -
Yetibuddha: Many of your photos come from an area where the Nez Perce lived. The ethic of a nature photographer is an interesting subject in and of itself. How much change can you make to the scene you found? Can you move a blade of grass or plant out of the way so as not to block a flower you are shooting? I used to carry a small spray bottle of water to add "dew" to wildflowers. Can you place a colored leaf to two on rocks in the foreground of a wide angle shot to add color to your composition? Can you use a long exposure to change flowing water in a creek into "smoke"? Can you use a long exposure to change waves into "fog"? Can you add fill flash? I would be willing to do all these things because I still consider them to be "natural" to the scene I found; just adding some additional "pop" or removing some obstructions. BUT, I wouldn't add a zebra to a forest of aspen trunks even though I agree it would be a very striking image. Why? Just too unnatural. Zebra's would never be found in an aspen forest. Hence, while the effect would be striking it would just be too unbelievable to me. My ethic is to produce an image you could have come across naturally or one your eye would see if it took time exposures.
Of course, others can, and do, have other ethics. Some artists even go so far as to completely changing the natural landscape by wrapping it in fabric or painting it. I just want to enhance nature a bit. But, I certainly have to admit I would look twice at zebras in an aspen forest! Maybe that is the point: produce a photo one would never see if you had not created it! That can be a valid photo philosophy. So at first glance you see a forest of aspen trunks, nice: but wait, then you notice something in there among those tree trunks. What is it? Look closer and you see a zebra looking right at you! Wow! Amazing surprise contained in the photo. Appaloosa or zebra looking at you? Which would be "right" or "better" or add more "punch"? Interesting subject to think about.
Posted 7 months ago # -
And, my completely unofficial praise to:
benji2505
Yetibuddha
proudgeek
GabbbFor outstanding photos on PAD page 13.
All very nicely done. (This means "wish I had done them myself.")
Posted 7 months ago # -
Donaldjose, you've identified a number of intriguing questions, basically focused on the notion of how much change from the natural is acceptable in a photograph. I agree that these are good questions that a photographer asks, at least implicitly, when composing an image. My point was that the response to this question is influenced by the story one wants to tell and one's photographic ethic. So there is no real right or wrong response.
So seeing a zebra in an image of an aspen stand may make for whatever purpose, a powerful story. But viewers (who know something about zebra habitat) would not think the photo as an authentic image (by the way, I hesitate bringing up the term authentic because there are raging debates all over about what this means.
Any rate, thanks for raising these questions.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Msmoto,
thanks for your comments. One reason I enjoy this board over many others is that it is both inspiring and positive. By positive, I don't mean without critique. Those two attributes I feel lead one to want to do better, to create powerful images, regardless of the topic, that tell neat stories--whether those stories are of racing cars, weathered people, incredible landscapes, wierd bugs, amazing flowers, great portraits or even of flying objects.
And by the way, many photos posted here are ones that "I wish I had done myself"!
Posted 7 months ago # -
All this talk of zebras and horses. Took this yesterday.
D3100, 50mm f/1.8G, f/8, 1/250, ISO 100Posted 7 months ago # -
Thank you Moto and everyone else. Interesting exchange. I'd say authenticity is a relative term is the world of digital photography. This image, while it was good out of camera, in my mind was improved by my altering reality here and there. It's a fine line and opens up a much larger discussion that I wouldn't presume to use to overwhelm the PAD thread.
Truth be told, I was in a restaurant the night before I shot this and saw something very similar printed on glass that was on sale for $3,000. I figured I could do something just as good (and think I succeeded). It was nothing more than that.Posted 7 months ago # -
ProudGeek, yep, you did. We are often inspired, as we should be, by the art of others.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Taking something randomly created in nature which contains a pattern and creating an abstract out of it is one technique in photography to create stunning images which invoke "What is that?" in the mind of the viewer. Proudgeek's aspen photo succeeds in applying this technique.
Posted 7 months ago # -
I just love this time of year in South Korea:
Posted 7 months ago # -
Thanks everyone...out of all the just leaf shots that was the only one that really turned out.
Here are some mushrooms.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Here is my share for today.... 20 Mule Team Wagon from Death Valley (Harmony Borax Works)
D7000
Nikkor 10-24mm at 14mm
1/125
f/10
ISO 100
-1/3 EVPosted 7 months ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
