Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Bluebells  (Read 4469 times)

Alistair

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293
Bluebells
« on: May 04, 2009, 03:35:27 am »

The bluebells are out with a vengeance on the Ashridge Estate close by where I live here in Buckinghamshire. I have tried shooting them a number of times now in different lights and at different times of the day. However I am not getting images that convey the impact of this wonderful sight. Are there any tips you experts out there can share to help? Thanks!
Logged
Alistair

sojournerphoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 473
Bluebells
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2009, 08:11:16 am »

Quote from: Alistair
The bluebells are out with a vengeance on the Ashridge Estate close by where I live here in Buckinghamshire. I have tried shooting them a number of times now in different lights and at different times of the day. However I am not getting images that convey the impact of this wonderful sight. Are there any tips you experts out there can share to help? Thanks!


Given how lovely they are in the flesh, they can be surprisingly difficult to make anything of in a picture. In part I think that is because the colour that is so vivd to the eyes is actually from very discrete flowers, which doesn't work as well on paper as in reality. But some people have done wonderful stuff, so some ideas might include getting closer to fil the foreground with colour, looking to include a path motif (so the bluebells from a path through the wood, thinking about how you place trees and use the texture of their bark and ensuring that you have enough light in the print - often woods give you big dark areas that can spoil the feel of a sunny bluebell picture. Also, I think white balacne and colour rendering are important here - it doesn't need to be far off and the blues and greens don't work.

Mike
Logged

pete_truman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 116
    • http://www.ifootpath.com
Bluebells
« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2009, 07:06:20 pm »

They are difficult, I agree. The best results I have had are when the sky is cloudy but bright. In sunlight there will be too many shadows and excessive contrast. The evening sunlight does not work well either as the colour start to change to pink rather than the wonderful blue they are. Soon after rain works well. The viewing height, focal length and depth of field all make a huge difference as they would in any picture and to illustrate and hopefully help I've attached two very different attempts.

The first is in the woodland at Renishaw Hall, Derbyshire in May 2005. This was taken using a 35mm lens at f8. On a tripod at eye-level. No filters.
[attachment=13482:2005_0584.jpg]

The second image was in May 2008 at Hay Wood near the Longshaw Estate, Derbyshire. This was taken with a 100mm lens at f4. On a tripod about 30cm from the ground.
[attachment=13483:2008_2999.jpg]

As these will hopefully suggest you will need a wider angle and higher view to capture the broad expanse of colour. But a longer lens and selective focus can introduce some more interesting effects. In terms of the colours displayed, be very careful with colour balance and saturation as that can make a massive difference.

I too would be very interested to see other approaches...
Logged
Pete Truman

Alistair

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293
Bluebells
« Reply #3 on: May 05, 2009, 06:45:14 am »

Thanks Mike and Peter for your replies. I have been back now a few times and think I am starting to get somewhere. I will try and post some samples. Thanks again, Alistair.
Logged
Alistair

LoisWakeman

  • Guest
Bluebells
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2009, 11:01:54 am »

I've been chasing them too. I find that the blue is a bit unpredictable with auto WB, and can sometimes come out rather cyan - so a bit of colour balancing may be needed. The other thing is I think perceptual - the eye concentrates on the colour and misses all the distractions that the camera 'sees', thereby diluting the effect. There are two ways to help overcome that: choose your angle as parallel to the ground as you can (tripod legs short, knees firmly in the mud!), and use a long lens to compress distance.

I have been playing with layers and motion blur combined, and came up with this impression of the woods east of Lyme Regis.



and this one (a blend of differently focused layers) to recall the visual confusion as your eyes dart about:



and lastly: a straight shot showing the telephoto/dirty knees approach (150mm 35mm equivalent) - just a quick cut to show the principle.


Logged

fike

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1413
  • Hiker Photographer
    • trailpixie.net
Bluebells
« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2009, 10:09:04 am »

[quote name='LoisWakeman' post='281700' date='May 6 2009, 11:01 AM']I've been chasing them too. I find that the blue is a bit unpredictable with auto WB, and can sometimes come out rather cyan - so a bit of colour balancing may be needed. The other thing is I think perceptual - the eye concentrates on the colour and misses all the distractions that the camera 'sees', thereby diluting the effect. There are two ways to help overcome that: choose your angle as parallel to the ground as you can (tripod legs short, knees firmly in the mud!), and use a long lens to compress distance.

I have been playing with layers and motion blur combined, and came up with this impression of the woods east of Lyme Regis.
...

Lois,
Your second image is great! It really is a unique view of the colors and movement of the forest floor.  Great!!

Are you using an ND filter to lengthen your exposure times?
« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 10:12:51 am by fike »
Logged
Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer

LoisWakeman

  • Guest
Bluebells
« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2009, 10:38:20 am »

Quote from: fike
Are you using an ND filter to lengthen your exposure times?
Thanks Marc! No filter other than skylight for this one: this was made by stacking several shots taken at different focus points; each individual one has no motion blur but a limited DOF - partly a necessity as I was standing on a steep and very unstable slope, so had to use a wider aperture than I'd have liked due to a wobbly tripod. But the end result was worth it, as it forced me to think of another way of presenting this scene - a dazzling confusion of leaves and flowers.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2009, 10:39:07 am by LoisWakeman »
Logged

amcinroy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 54
Bluebells
« Reply #7 on: May 14, 2009, 09:15:07 am »

I wouldn't necessarily agree with the idea of overcast light.

Any kind of light can be good for bluebell photography. This was taken in the middle of the day with the sun blazing down.

Logged
Andy McInroy Photography
Landscapes of I

Rob Davison

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
    • http://www.pbase.com/mapleglen
Bluebells
« Reply #8 on: May 14, 2009, 09:15:22 pm »

Quote from: amcinroy
I wouldn't necessarily agree with the idea of overcast light.

Any kind of light can be good for bluebell photography. This was taken in the middle of the day with the sun blazing down.


There does seem to be a reasonable canopy provided by the trees in that photo which would serve to soften the light a little.

It is quite fascinating how they change depending on the quality of the light:

Early morning, quite bright sunshine




After sunset


High overcast


Unfortunately I have to wait until October here in the southern hemisphere until ours flower again...


Rob.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up