Oot today with “Gorgeous Lady” (Pentax-A* 200mm F2.8 ED), who can still turn a few heads, even at her age.

[chris.britingles]

Nice bokeh and simple elegant framing, the law of 2/3's always works
TTFN
Chris

[Kerrowdown]

Nice bokeh and simple elegant framing, the law of 2/3's always works

Thanks, just like myself clean and simple.

[photoptimist]

Wow! This image is amazingly constructed. Among the key elements that make the image so good are:

1) exposure toward the high-end of the scale accentuates the springtime/pastel color palette

2) strong orthogonal structures: sharp vertical plant stem, defocused horizontal background layers, sharp horizontal leaves, sharp vertical petals

3) overall placement of flowers at 1/3 over and in a "valley" midway between extremely defocused background lumps

4) micro-framing of the plant (distances of the frame edge to the highest flowers and lowest leaf)

5) three perfect layers of flowers with the dominating top layer and two side flowers "looking" nicely across the frame

6) extreme defocusing creates a better imagined image of the background fields, hedgerows, trees, sky, and clouds than an actual photo would create

[Top banana]

very nice, just shows that 'older' lenses can still give some great results...

[Kerrowdown]

Wow! This image is amazingly constructed. Among the key elements that make the image so good are:

Right so that's all ok then... well it must all be down to purely gut instinct and feel for an image.

As I really can't admit to going through all the thought process steps during image capture, even if I could get away with saying that I did.

[Kerrowdown]

very nice, just shows that 'older' lenses can still give some great results...

Thanks, just as well really, as all my "Ladies" are getting on a bit now.

[Chetverovod]

Wow! This image is amazingly constructed. Among the key elements that make the image so good are:

1) exposure toward the high-end of the scale accentuates the springtime/pastel color palette

2) strong orthogonal structures: sharp vertical plant stem, defocused horizontal background layers, sharp horizontal leaves, sharp vertical petals

3) overall placement of flowers at 1/3 over and in a "valley" midway between extremely defocused background lumps

4) micro-framing of the plant (distances of the frame edge to the highest flowers and lowest leaf)

5) three perfect layers of flowers with the dominating top layer and two side flowers "looking" nicely across the frame

6) extreme defocusing creates a better imagined image of the background fields, hedgerows, trees, sky, and clouds than an actual photo would create

Oh, this is a little school book, I have copied this to the my Evernotes.
Thank you!

---------- Post added 05-16-17 at 06:11 PM ----------

Nice photo, Kerrowdown!

[Kerrowdown]

Oh, this is a little school book, I have copied this to the my Evernotes

Be careful, I don't even know if he's right... it's all so way above my level of understanding.

Nice photo, Kerrowdown!

Thank you.

[photoptimist]

Be careful, I don't even know if he's right... it's all so way above my level of understanding.

Who knows if I'm right!

I only ask myself a bunch of what-ifs: what-if the exposure were light/darker, what-if the background were sharper/blurrier, what-if the flowers were flipped, what-if the camera were angled up/down/left/right, what if the camera were moved up/down/left/right, what-if the focal length were longer/shorter, what-if the lighting was different, what-if the picture were taken last week or next week, what-if the flowers were yellow, etc. etc.

Would the picture be better or worse in any of these what-ifs?????

In many images, the answer is "better" for some of these what-ifs. Some adjustment(s) could improve the picture. There's probably literally a billion pictures of flower-in-foreground, landscape-in-background on the internet and most of them could have been better.

In some rare cases -- and this image is one of them -- the answers are "worse" on every question. Nothing could make the image better. For me, that's what makes a great image.

But I could be wrong. I'm very sure other photographers have their own definitions for what makes a image great.

[Kerrowdown]

a bunch of what-ifs: what-if the exposure were light/darker, what-if the background were sharper/blurrier, what-if the flowers were flipped, what-if the camera were angled up/down/left/right, what if the camera were moved up/down/left/right, what-if the focal length were longer/shorter, what-if the lighting was different, what-if the picture were taken last week or next week, what-if the flowers were yellow, etc. etc.

If I had to worry about all this lot each time... I'd never get a picture taken.

In some rare cases -- and this image is one of them -- the answers are "worse" on every question. Nothing could make the image better. For me, that's what makes a great image.

Thank you for those very kind and thoughtful words.

[Fenwoodian]

Terrific colors! So nice to see realistic and understated colors for a change.

For my taste, there are far to many super-saturated, garish images on the Internet these days.

Your photo is like a whisper, while others are more like a shout.

[Chetverovod]

If I had to worry about all this lot each time... I'd never get a picture taken.

Just make two photos - one before and one after

[Kerrowdown]

Terrific colors!

Thank you.

Your photo is like a whisper

Aye... smooth and pastel colours all in one, done quietly.

[Kerrowdown]

Just make two photos - one before and one after

What-ifs listed total of at least nineteen... that's a lot of extra imagery.