"White Thistle" - Jerome Belthrop




White Thistle--Hohenheim Botanical Garden, Hohenheim University

Camera:   Contax G1
Lens:   Carl Zeiss Hologon 16mm f/8
Film:  
Exposure:   F 2.8
Flash:  
Support:  
Filter:  
Adjustment:  
Posted:   07-Apr-2002

Rating: 7.00 (7 ratings)

Comments

very nice

Its nice to see the 2.8 DOF of the 9O, Jerome maybe you should repost this in a higher resolution it seems to me that the background even unshard is better than on this pic no ?

Jan Brouckaert     07-Apr-2002 at 14:20

Very

clever Jerome. Eminent use of the 90 mm at 2,8.

Knut Skjærven     07-Apr-2002 at 14:56

Avant. . .

Jan, Knut, thank you. Yes, I have an abbreviated list of self-assignments---that I've culled together over the last 12 months that I want to use to improve my understanding of the perception and perspective use of aperture and focal lengths. One item of the list was only to make images on one role using the 90mm at F 2.8 with an 100 ASA film. This was the result of that assignment.
Jan unfortunately the original composition is lacking in pre-visualization--the singular fairly sharp thistle was nearly in the middle of this frame instead of in the far 1/3 left position. To make a larger image of good resolution with the same composition is beyond my equipment's abilities --my flatbed scanner can't resolve a reasonably sharp, larger image of this image. :-(
Knut--I rummaged through my negatives, after seeing your "latest" plant posts and resurrected this one out of envy :-) .

Jerome Belthrop     07-Apr-2002 at 23:05

Nice Shot

Nice bokeh, as they say

Kevin Conville     07-Apr-2002 at 23:30

Crop?

Jerome, I really like this soft colors, the detail, and the creative DOF is great. My only suggestion would be to crop the frame just to the right of the last orb. I don't think the remaining 1/7 or so of the frame adds anything. And re-submitting it at a higher scan resolution would also be nice.

Karl Winkler     16-Apr-2002 at 16:55

Wilco. . . .

Karl, thank you for the nudge. The last one seventh--really does not have to be there--you ar right. :-) Now let find that negative . . . :-)

Jerome Belthrop     17-Apr-2002 at 08:26