From: caroleigh@c...
Date: Tue Feb 22, 2005 8:06 am
Subject: Critique: Rich Baker (Lighting - 3 photos)
Pansy photos - Oh, yes, look how much more the water droplets stand out
in the non-diffused photo rather than the diffused. So THAT'S good to
know -- one more little piece of information to tuck away in our collective
brains. And notice, too, how the lighting on the far right droplet created
a backlit glow on the petal. Due to your lighting setup, the direct light
isn't all that direct, so the difference in the photos (non-diffused/diffused)
isn't all that dramatic. Wait . . . let me look again . . . nope, just
a little softer, showing less texture in the diffused image. You still
have the backlit glow from the water droplet coming through in the diffused
example, which surprised me.
Illuminated Tulip - Sort of reminds me of the space station-like platforms
in the sand tufas at Navy Beach at Mono Lake . . . Very cool illumination
and you did it in a very subtle manner, which I like. It would have been
easy to have really overdone the illumination factor here. The only thing
that's bugging me a little bit is the light-colored area there in the
upper right, which constantly draws my eye away from the main focal point
there in the center of the tulip. I wish, too, that we could see more
of the right-hand "stalagmite" without it being blocked by a
petal. But I'd say you did very well, creating a dramatic, interestingly-lighted
photo. And it's a trick that you can use on all sorts of flowers in the
future (should you so desire).
Carol Leigh
