hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: photo backgrounds, etc.
  • Subject: Re: photo backgrounds, etc.
  • From: Autmirislvr@aol.com
  • Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:01:16 -0500


<<Personally I think too much is made over true colors If you ever tried to use a color chart to describe a live flower you would know that you get different readings in different lights and different days. I do think most people understand this intuitively.>>
Robert has a big point here.  Maybe a 'true color' is only true for the moment, or that time and place.  So much has been said about the degrading of the color chart that I keep mine in the box, inside a file cabinet.  It only sees the light of day while I'm using it to attempt labeling the colors on a bloom. 
In addition, seasons, soils, and climates change the appearance of most irises.  I've seen this in my own irises and others.  Just go though the online sites and look at the different pictures of 'Again and Again' for an example.  None have matched the beautiful creature I first saw bloom one August day in the SKIS display garden.  When it first bloomed in my personal garden, I feared it was the wrong iris until I made that journey through the various sites. 
My 2.
Betty Wilkerson
KY zone 6

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Pries <robertpries@embarqmail.com>
To: iris-photos@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, Feb 4, 2010 6:31 am
Subject: Re: [iris-photos] photo backgrounds, etc.

I agree with Lowell about pictures capturing a moment; This is why we hope to have many photos of any iris on the Iris wiki. I can remember a set of photos I put together that showed a spuria Iris that looked pure purple from one angle but seeing it from another angle the bright yellow signal dominated. In person we have the luxury of moving our eye around the plant but a photo captures only one view. I am sure our future generation wil overcome this with holographs but for now we are trapped in our own time and have to be sophisticated enough to understand our limitations. Personally I think too much is made over true colors If you ever tried to use a color chart to describe a live flower you would know that you get different readings in different lights and different days. I do think most people understand this intuitively.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lowell Baumunk" <LBaumunk@iriscolorado.com>
To: "Iris Photos" <iris-photos@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2010 9:42:00 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [iris-photos] photo backgrounds, etc.

About artificial backgrounds:  To do a really good job with an artificial background, the iris should be selected and made into a separate layer.  (I use Photoshop).  At that point, one can use anything for a background.  An example from one of my ads is attached.  It is a somewhat tedious process, taking about an hour to carefully trace the outlines of the flower.  I've found that shortcut selection methods don't meet the standards needed for publication.  I usually only do this when the original background is unsatisfactory- something distracting or unattractive.  I think Brock's ideas about creating a good background with the camera are excellent.
My theory about the truth of photos:  By stopping a subject in time, a photo gives a different impression than we get with our continuous perception.  A good example is: when taking a number of photos of a beautiful woman, there will always be a few in which she does not look at all beautiful.  But it is a true image.  The difference is that when we see her "live", we get an overall impression in which those less flattering angles become unimportant.  And yes, when we select a photo of an iris to share, we should check to be sure it matches our overall impression of the flower.
Lowell Baumunk
It's way above my ability, I'm afraid. But I'll ask anyway. Does that background have to be black? Would the program substitute other colors in lieu of black? I'm asking because when looking at the colors on my monitor after taking a photo it's more important to me that they display accurately. More important than being pretty. The perception of what you see can be altered by the background color. So using green, gray, white or other colors in addition to black could shift what the eye perceives to a more accurate representation of what you actually see using the naked eye. Photos are strange things. They can fail miserably for catching some things; or they can enhance details out of proportion to what the blooms really show. I wouldn't say they lie exactly, but the truth is certainly altered sometimes.

Donald Eaves
Texas Zone 7b, USA

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement