Numbers 1,4,7 and 8 do it for me, Marnie.
The others are too shaded. But they too show a delicacy of seeing not
apparent in your more recent 'paranoia' series.
Thanks for sharing... And don't forget to shoot them again in a few
weeks!
Joe
On Feb 2, 2009, at 22:01 , [email protected] wrote:
Not really. :-) Almost... getting there...
There's a tree around the corner, sort of in my backyard, that is
just
gorgeous every spring. (This year with so little rain, not sure
what will happen.)
I think they are cherry blossoms, if wrong, tell me.
Lots of caveats, because this is almost a "reject" GESO. Never
shown them
online before for that reason.
These were taken in 2005. I was testing out a new zoom (a good
one), and I
deliberately picked out an overcast day. But I didn't know what the
heck I was
doing. I was purposely using a shallow DOF, but in many cases, most
cases,
it was TOO shallow. And maybe too overcast. Nothing came out as I
wanted. I
think, now, 4 years later I probably could do better. We shall
see... if I
remember to shoot them this year.
I picked out the best of a bad lot, and did nothing much to them.
http://www.mapphotography.com/Flowers/index.html
If you think any one (or two) is passable, wouldn't mind hearing
about it.
At the very least it gives you snow bound/fallen on guys something
spring-like to look at.
Joseph McAllister
[email protected]
http://gallery.me.com/jomac
http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
