[Leica] non-leica macro fun with flowers

[yup at pacbell.net (doug kim)]

thanks, ted! such great and incisive commentary. and you're dead on with
pretty much everything.

for me it was nothing but a novelty shoot and i cannot believe i had so much
fun with the subject matter and the lens. i could have spent a week in that
garden.

i actually started obsessing about buying a macro lens til i realized i
would probably only use it once a year.

thanks again!

doug

On 4/26/04 7:19 PM, "Ted Grant" <tedgrant@shaw.ca> wrote:

> doug kim showed and said:
> Subject: [Leica] non-leica macro fun with flowers
> 
>> i'm not a flowers kind of guy but had to rent a nikon D1X and a 110mm
> macro
>> for this gig. what fun!!!
>> 
>> http://www.ricecracker.net/descanso/
>> 
>> all comments welcome and i promise to post some leica stuff next!<<<<<<<<
> 
> Hi Doug,
> One of the toughest shoots anyone can have who isn't a regular macro flower
> shooter is just what you've done.
> 
> Some of yours are very well done, others mediocre. No offence intended, as
> you are not alone in shooting this and doing it not absolutely perfect, even
> though the majority look very cool.  Been there done it and I swear in the
> view finder screen, everyone I shot was a million dollar flower shot. :-)
> 
> We get a macro and we're inside the flowers and the colours are beautiful
> and we get absolutely suckered by the colours, forms, shapes iridescence and
> what's on the view finder screen as a " drop dead gorgeous" shot because we
> don't shoot this stuff every day> Nor do we normally look at the world in
> this fashion every day.
> 
> Therefore we tend to shoot things that look cool, well we think they're
> cool, when in real-time they're merely colour exposures of interesting
> looking things that have no meaning to them compositionally nor design. Some
> do of course, however for every great one there are ten so-so .
> 
> OK they sort of look great, but it's being in focus at not quite the right
> point in-relation to the main point of colour design or some other minor
> failing. That when you really take the time to study each one you get real
> hard nosed to what works and what doesn't..
> 
> But like I said some are smashingly good. Others, it's like, "So?" And it's
> a tough call to sort them out because in this kind of photography it's in
> the eye of the beholder that sorts out the magical ones from the not so
> magical ones.
> 
> for what it's worth.
> 
> ted
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

-- 
doug kim
http://www.ricecracker.net/