Just when we thought Spring was here, the temperatures dropped to the low 30’s last night. This morning was bright and clear, but “finger numbing” chilly. With the wind blowing, I worked hard to come up with the best compromise between a shutter speed fast enough to freeze the daffodils and a depth of field large enough to get some detail in the background. I was not too successful. But it was still a bright Spring morning shot.
Lesson learned: Sometimes a compromise cannot be reached … move on!
I call nonsense: . . . “not too successful” – ha! Assuming no photoshop’ing, for a minute, I gotta say how the image hits hard in contrast. Yes, I include the usual contrast of brightness, but you offer also the contrast of resolution of background v. resolution of foreground.
Significance of that to me–you tell a story that there’s a permanence to the flowers. That is, the rock slabs and the building can never, ever, present the way the flowers do now at this nanosecond of your image-making. Your audience will remember the flowers well after the background is forgot. Nicely demonstrated irony?
It helps that the daffodils are bright color, but you have a general lighting differential going on, too.
Who wrote it / said it, I dunno, but there’s a school of thought that goes thusly: Once the artist creates, he loses ownership. The work of art assumes innumerable new existences—every time another person first takes it into consciousness, personalized for each new individual.
I like David’s comments as much as your image Karl. Well done.