[Minimonster]

Up close with an African Daisy. Sony A7 with Tamron 90/2.8 macro

[edom31]

MAF 100/2.8 Macro A35

[noelcmn]

The other side

[WPRESTO]

Three macro or near macro images of pink lady slippers (= moccasin flower) that are approaching the peak of their bloom locally.. All of these are deep crops rather than snugging the camera in close. If the lens is good enough, you can retain detail and gain DOF by cropping instead of framing tightly. BTW: In this group I particularly like the second image.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[OrchidJulie]

Three macro or near macro images of pink lady slippers (= moccasin flower) that are approaching the peak of their bloom locally.. All of these are deep crops rather than snugging the camera in close. If the lens is good enough, you can retain detail and gain DOF by cropping instead of framing tightly. BTW: In this group I particularly like the second image.

I like them all, Walt, although I can't say the "slippers" are my fave orchids. These are genus Cypripedium, the Asian slippers are Paphiopedilum, "paphs" for short. They are wildly popular among some orchid growers, so much so that a common joke among enthusiasts is that there are two kinds of orchid growers... the paph people, and everybody else. I don't know the current status of this particular research, but a few years ago some plant scientists made the outrageous claim that the slippers (all genera) aren't really orchids at all... quelle horror! Offhand I don't recall the supporting reasoning behind that, but -- not surprisingly -- it got the slipper-folk in a tizzy.

[WPRESTO]

. I don't know the current status of this particular research, but a few years ago some plant scientists made the outrageous claim that the slippers (all genera) aren't really orchids at all... quelle horror! Offhand I don't recall the supporting reasoning behind that, but -- not surprisingly -- it got the slipper-folk in a tizzy.

Five will get you ten or more that it has something to do with DNA. We have three species of Rana here in MessyChewBits that come out in sequence singing in the ponds - - first R sylvaticus, then R clamitans, and then good old deep-throated R. catesbeianus. Now they've all become Lithobates, poor things. But still their calls can be heard in the same sequence every early Spring, late Spring, then Summer.

[OrchidJulie]

Five will get you ten or more that it has something to do with DNA. We have three species of Rana here in MessyChewBits that come out in sequence singing in the ponds - - first R sylvaticus, then R clamitans, and then good old deep-throated R. catesbeianus. Now they've all become Lithobates, poor things. But still their calls can be heard in the same sequence every early Spring, late Spring, then Summer.

Indeed, I did think about DNA evidence, lots of DNA research going on in orchid taxonomy, great upheavals in the last 10-15 years with respect to taxonomic changes. It's headache-inducing to try to keep current on it (I'll spare you the gory details), huge reclassifications of species and genera, things that we "knew" are no longer valid, name changes galore. So that's possible, but my recollection of this paph kerfluffle was that it came about before the Great DNA Analysis effort, that the taxonomists promulgating it were basing the conclusions on something else altogether, most likely morphological studies. But, not being a "paph person" myself, I never paid it much attention and made offhand jokes about it ("you know, they aren't even orchids...") to slavering paph addicts. So I don't actually know the origin of the claim, nor the current status of the, er, debate. Maybe I should try to excavate something and inform myself.

[WPRESTO]

. Maybe I should try to excavate something and inform myself.

"Excavate?" Are you hopping to defuse the debate by uncovering some fossil orchids? As a paleontologist, let me warn you that new fossils always stir the pot rather than settling the turmoil. Every time a new fossil of something human is discovered, the entire picture of human evolution is re-written, or so claim the discoverers of that fossil.

[OrchidJulie]

"Excavate?" Are you hopping to defuse the debate by uncovering some fossil orchids? As a paleontologist, let me warn you that new fossils always stir the pot rather than settling the turmoil. Every time a new fossil of something human is discovered, the entire picture of human evolution is re-written, or so claim the discoverers of that fossil.

Oh no, just exagerrating the effort of trying to find some reference or other. Preliminary poking about hasn't turned up anything, might have to contact an expert or two, although, sadly, the two best sources I know -- er knew -- personally have passed away. I don't know the status or even existence of fossil orchids, although there are some examples of insects-in-amber with orchid pollinia.

[WPRESTO]

Oh no, just exagerrating the effort of trying to find some reference or other. Preliminary poking about hasn't turned up anything, might have to contact an expert or two, although, sadly, the two best sources I know -- er knew -- personally have passed away. I don't know the status or even existence of fossil orchids, although there are some examples of insects-in-amber with orchid pollinia.

This is probably the example of an insect with pollinia, but in case it isn't

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/08/first-orchid-fossil-puts-show...ion-years-old/

[OrchidJulie]

This is probably the example of an insect with pollinia, but in case it isn't

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/08/first-orchid-fossil-puts-show...ion-years-old/

Yup, that's one, probably the best known example. Funny, I won a modest prize years ago, in a "what's this?" sort of contest published by a pesticide journal's email list, identifying "orchid pollinia on a bee in amber". I think it was that same image.. The "prize" was a copy of the journal's latest handbook (otherwise available for $ale). Quite useful, although I no longer have it, left it with the resource library at the former workplace.

[WPRESTO]

Yup, that's one, probably the best known example. Funny, I won a modest prize years ago, in a "what's this?" sort of contest published by a pesticide journal's email list, identifying "orchid pollinia on a bee in amber". I think it was that same image.. The "prize" was a copy of the journal's latest handbook (otherwise available for $ale). Quite useful, although I no longer have it, left it with the resource library at the former workplace.

Kodak ran a contest for photographs that demonstrated the exceptional qualities of Ektar 25, a super-fine grained, high resolution color negative film. There was a first prize and three runners up. I was one of the runners up. The top prize got a new Nikon with lens. As runner up, I got a letter that said "congratulations." I thought I'd get at least a few rolls of film.

[OrchidJulie]

Kodak ran a contest for photographs that demonstrated the exceptional qualities of Ektar 25, a super-fine grained, high resolution color negative film. There was a first prize and three runners up. I was one of the runners up. The top prize got a new Nikon with lens. As runner up, I got a letter that said "congratulations." I thought I'd get at least a few rolls of film.

Bummer! They could have sent you a brick of film, wouldn't have cost them much, maybe postage, but it would have garnered a lot of positive PR for them. How disappointing! But congratulations on the runner-up thing, worth some bragging rights if nothing else!

[Minimonster]

Orange flower. K3 iii with DA 35/2.8 macro limited

[WPRESTO]

These are small flowers, 0.75 inches (about 2.0cm)) across a blossom. Struggling to make an ID so if anyone has a suggestion it would be welcome. Best I could do is something in the mustard family. (Lady's smock =

Cardamine ??)