I think the two most important things are to take lots of pictures - the more you take the more likely you are to get a really got shot, and choose a time that has good lighting. I prefer morning, either foggy mornings or just when the sun is breaking through. Evening can be good too, depending on the quality of light. Midday or really bright conditions aren't ideal because there can be too much glare. So my advice is to take lots of pictures at different times on different days and you should get some good results.

I can't help you with bush shots though, they are much harder. I usually take a few and then discard them because they just aren't as good as the close ups.

A good camera is the first prerequisite. I spent years trying to coax good pictures out of a Canon Powershot s5000. Some of them actually looked pretty darn good.....until I got my Canon Rebel T3..... WOW .... What a difference a camera makes ! ! ! !

Susan

I will agree on the good camera. I get lazy and take photos with my phone but they are nothing like the ones from my hubby's Nikon. First, I have to find it and then I usually have to charge it. Then I forget I was gonna take pictures. Quicker to grab the phone, lol ...

A good camera as others have stated is the best starting point. I never take shots during the day unless it's foggy or overcast. Morning and evening shots differ from each other, but each can give good results. I always take lots of pictures in order to be able to choose the best. As for bush shots, I think the first prerequisite is that you have a good-looking bush to start out with. That leaves out a lot of the hybrid teas and floribundas. The older roses (of which I thankfully have a lot) are a lot more photogenic, especially once they've attained a certain size. Getting down to their level rather than shooting from above can sometimes also be helpful. For me the most important thing has been to just keep doing it; that's how you develop an "eye" for what's good and what isn't. Cropping pictures afterwards to leave out extraneous background and bring the rose closer has also been very helpful to me. Good luck!

Not much of a help but I just have to say this: I find that sometimes the most 'spectacular photos' can look 'fake' - can't think of a better word...it makes you wonder is that really what the rose look like in real life? I really prefer if people didn't over do it with the colour texture.

I take lots of pics and prefer taking them during times when the sun is not glaring and ruining the pic...lol
I have a cheap camera so taking lots of pics is a must for me. A better camera would be a plus though...
I do not use photoshop or anything like that. What you see is what you get...

Too many of the pics I see have over-saturated reds. With most CCS chips (digital cameras), pure red is easily over-saturated to a brilliant magenta. If you shoot automatic or programmed mode in almost any digital camera, magenta is what you'll get - sometimes with an almost metallic sheen.

Instead, go to manual mode and take pics of reds in full sun, but drop 2-3 f-stops down (underexposed) and use a very low-power setting of fill-in flash. You can get perfect reds almost like the old Kodachrome slides.

{{gwi:286515}}
{{gwi:286516}}

Sorry, I meant CCD, not CCS - those two pics were with a little Canon PowerShot A80, btw.

One of the things my earliest Photography profs emphasized was that "film is cheap." They meant -- make many exposures, to emphasize your chances of getting "the" shot.

Nowadays, with Digital photography, "film" is FREE.
Take the FIRST shot you can get, just in case there's not a second chance.
Then, take your time, and make many exposures.

Jeri

Yes, an expensive camera would be nice (I keep asking for it but so far no one's coughed it up) but it isn't mandatory either. I have a Fuji Film FinePix S700 that was under $200.00 and I my photos have won contests and been published. My first camera was an even smaller, cheaper Fuji and that's what won me my first contest. The camera helps but you have to know what it can do and how to use it and what to shoot.

It takes time and practice and taking lots and lots of pictures and eventually you do develop an eye for what's going to be good and what's not. I may take 200 pictures in one day. 50 of those might be fairly good and probably less than 10 are really good. You know the ones where the light, the angle and the rose all come together just perfect. I take pictures 2, 3 and 4 times a day. Of the same roses. They change constantly and you only get one chance at that perfect stage of bloom before it blows. It took me a long time to figure out that you have to look at what's going on in the background because it can really mess up a shot of a beautiful bloom. I've also learned to check for bugs, lol! I took so many pictures of perfect blooms with some fly or spider smack dab in the middle of it! I now prep my blooms for photos just like I would for exhibition. I check for bugs, wipe off the leaves, make sure there's nothing extraneous on the bloom or stems, like spider webs or dead fish fly skeletons, which can be problematic this time of year.

I use my macro (close-up setting) setting 99% if the time. I put the macro on and then zoom in on the bloom (or bush) to frame it properly. I like this because the bloom will be in very sharp focus but the background will completely blur out. I've been known to balance on stones and bricks, scale walls and fences, climb trees or ladders, kneel, squat, sit and lie on my belly to get the right angle. What ever it takes to get the shot. I also like to under expose my pictures just a little. You can always brighten it later but an over exposed shot is pretty much hopeless. That's why all the advice about shooting in the early morning or late evening is all good. The light is softer and more forgiving. Early morning light is clearer. Evening light is more golden in color. They each have their own effect. Noon day sun can be done (and can give you those beautifully, brightly lit blooms with the ink black backgrounds. I've done it quite by accident a couple of times.) but it's really tough. And noon sun NEVER works on reds! Reds, and sometimes purples, are usually the hardest ones to capture correctly anytime of day but they fluoresce in high sunlight. I also use my flash a lot of the time even in broad daylight. It reduces shadows and evens out the colors. Makes the leaves look shiny too!

I freely admit that I clean up my photos and having a good photo editing program is a big help. If I do have something in the background that's very distracting I can crop it out or just darken it so it's not so obnoxious. And yes, I've Photoshopped out a bug or two in my day. I don't alter the colors or blooms but if I wanted to look at bugs I'd be an entomologist not a rosarian!

Rosetom, what gorgeous red rose is that?!

The colour of daylight changes by the minute and the white balance estimation - by even the most sophisticated cameras - is frequently way off the mark, in the same way that even the best light meters are often fooled by extremes of lighting.
Getting reasonably accurate colour when photographing rose blooms is often quite difficult. One aid that has been around for a very long time is to take a reference shot which include a photographic grey card. Grey cards are neutral grey on one side and usually a neutral white on the other. When the grey or white in your reference shots is neutral in colour - without any casts - you can take it that the colour of your subject is also reasonably accurate.
Most photographic dealers stock grey cards.

I got a Sony SLR camera after using a Canon Elph for years. The quality of the pictures is 100% better. Also I try to find the best formed specimen I can. The picture turns out so much better.

seil: Rosetom, what gorgeous red rose is that?!

The top pic is Liebeszauber, the bottom is Ingrid Bergman.

Oh Rosetom, you just made my day as I just purchased an Ingrid Bergman this past weekend!

When I started trying to capture the beauty of roses, digitally, I had no idea that rose photography was a complete hobby/art/science/obsession unto itself.

I am not sure if I am encouraged or discouraged with the conclusion I've come to. But I think I'm going to have to move forward capturing their beauty with my eyes and leave the cameras to those with more talent in that area than I.

seil, my first digital was the Fuji. I still have it. I did upgrade to a Nikon because the Fuji was very slow. However, I think for flowers, the Fuji took better pictures (most of the time the flowers don't move, so it didn't matter how slow the camera was) and the macro was excellent for close in shots of blooms and even bugs.

I have to try some of the lighting techniques mentioned above. I really don't know how to use a camera so a good shot is more luck than anything. I do try to go out when it's overcast or be in partial shade where you can get some good shots.

Here is one I took of Graham Thomas. It was a very sunny day, but I have GT in some afternoon shade so I was able to get this picture without the color being washed out by the sun:

{{gwi:286517}}

Haromony, don't stop trying! The more you do it the better and better your shots will get. You just have to play with your camera and experiment a lot. When I get a new camera I'll go out and shoot 10/20 pictures of the same bloom trying out all the different settings and see what I like best and what the camera can and can't do. That's the best way to learn. Practice, practice, practice!

Thanks, rosetom, they're both beauties. Wish my Ingrid had lived to give me such a bloom!

Oh, buford, I am so glad to hear that someone else thinks that Fuji makes a good camera! I'm tired of people looking down on it like it's something inferior. They really do take beautiful pictures and are way less expensive than the big names like Nikon and Canon. I've been looking at the HS10 but it's over $300 and I have been able to get it yet. I did SLRs for years when I was younger. I still have cases of lenses and equipment and I just don't want to go that route anymore. I want something that's versatile but still small, light weight, easy to use and doesn't cost an arm and a leg. The Fuji's always seem to fit the bill.

I think you did a great job on that picture! You caught the light really well. That's why I like to go out and shoot several times a day because you never know when you're going to get that perfect moment of light!

I still have a resistance to go deeper into the technical aspects of photography and agree with harmonyp, who said "I had no idea that rose photography was a complete hobby/art/science/obsession unto itself". All I want at this point is to take some reasonably good pictures of my roses and my garden mainly to post on my blog to share them with others.

As some of you have said I found it helpful:
- to take lots and lots of photos at different times of the day
- to change the angle I shoot from sometimes brings surprisingly good results
- starting with a very beautiful rose and checking for bugs prior to shooting if it is for a close-up is a benefit
- paying attention to the background
- cropping photos
- never take photos when it is windy

These few things can easily be done, are not to time consuming and expensive, and can improve the quality of a photo quite a bit in my opinion.

Maybe in the future I will start to practice more elaborate techniques and will try out some of the tips given here by others, but I don't want to make it another time and money consuming hobby. Sorry my garden comes first :-)! Still I would like to thank everyone for participating and sharing their photography secrets!

Christina

Here is a link that might be useful: Organic Garden Dreams

Use a tripod. A decent one can be had for little money (mine was $15).

Dappled shade can produce some wonderful effects.

Study the photos in rose catalogs like Austin's and Weeks to see how the pros do it. Try to copy what they do just for practice and education and see what you come up with.

The best light for garden shots is about 30 minutes to 1 hour after sunrise.

I've read through this thread a handful of times now. Today when I took the dogs out on their potty run at 11:30am, I grabbed the camera and shot 10 shots, just trying to keep in mind what I've read. Amazingly I got two that I liked.

Wow, what a difference a thread makes!

{{gwi:286518}}
Blue Girl

Wow,you great,harmony! That rose and your photo of it are beautiful!

I'm trying to choose between 4 cameras, and intend (hope) to shoot a lot of closeups of my roses. Any opinions on the following?
Panasonic Luminex L5, Samsung TL 500, Canon S95, Sony (can't remember--it's the really popular top of the line point and shoot)
Thanks!

I have a Panasonic Luminex DMC-F25 bought 5 years ago. It has been trouble free, and taken excellent photos all these years from nothing but "Simple" mode. Now after this thread, that I've been actually motivated to learn how to use it (5 years and didn't know how to set the f-stop!), I'm still as happy as ever with it. Simple mode worked fine for the horse photos. Doesn't work at all for the rose photos!