The same flower.

[Jack56]

I really like to know what your favourite of the two is.
Thank you for your comments.

 

[privatebydesign]

2nd, by a long way.

 

[Jack56]

Thanks.
Can you tell me why? Because of the shape or because of the more natural background?

 

[privatebydesign]

1 looks like a scientific study with no emotion or feeling, 2 looks like a photo with context and evokes feeling.

 

[Jack56]

Ok, I totally agree!!

 

[dcm]

2nd. It appears to have depth while the other appears flat. That could be related to DOF differences as well as the background differences.

 

[thepancakeman]

I'm going to dissent and prefer the first one. To me the 2nd one is a very generic flower picture that I feel like I've seen a million times. The first one by virtue of not having the green background seems more unique and creative, which to me means more interesting.

That being said, it depends a bit on the audience/target application. If it's for a book on flowers, the 2nd one has a more realistic presentation.

 

[Jack56]

Both are shot at f/8. The first one was shot this afternoon when the flower was open. I had a yellow paper on the ground. The second one was shot yesterday in the evening when the flower was more closed for the night.

 

[Jack56]

I'm going to dissent and prefer the first one. To me the 2nd one is a very generic flower picture that I feel like I've seen a million times. The first one by virtue of not having the green background seems more unique and creative, which to me means more interesting.

That being said, it depends a bit on the audience/target application. If it's for a book on flowers, the 2nd one has a more realistic presentation.

And I agree with you too.
And that's the point. I thought I want to be a bit more creative, but I also like to "please" the audience.
Will the audience be "pleased" with the first one?

 

[IMG_0001]

I'd say I like the first one better as a concept, but that there is something that makes it 'unconfortable'. The yellow background overpowers the flower and catches the eye too much in my opinion. By catching the eye, it also bring it outwards and makes your sight leave the image. I'd try to desaturate it a bit to make it quieter, or may be just a tiny amount of vignette to bring the eye back to the subject.

In the end, its just that the yellow should be tuned to makes the flower pop more whithout robbing the show.

Regards,

 

[sagittariansrock]

Disregarding the background, the second one feels three-dimensional with a clear sense of depth.
The first one looks flat (as in two-dimensional).

 

[ahab1372]

flat or not, I like the first one better

 

[danski0224]

I really like to know what your favourite of the two is.
Thank you for your comments.

I am not drawn to either of them.

The yellow background doesn't work for me in the first image.

The partially closed flower shot from that perspective doesn't create any interest for me. I'd probably like or be interested in something other than straight on.

If the first image had the background of the second image, I would prefer that. That shade of yellow is too much, it looks fake to me.

$.02

 

[K-amps]

Second.

First is sterile, distracting, clinical, the yellow is too bright...