Georgia O'Keefe inspired Rose

I shot this with my 60 mm ancient (35 year old) macro nikon lens, handheld on the D800. I have done many light edits to this flower, all with the goal of making it a Georgia O’Keefe inspired portrait. The saturation , hues and luminance were adjusted, along with a layer mask with multiply to paint in tone down some of the light areas. I used very minimal topaz layer as well.

Then I really played with the cropping and angle to get it more of the Georgia O’Keefe look, keeping in mind that she often presented only part of the flower and had bits of the background showing here and there.

Interested in reactions. Both pro and con. :):thinking:

Regards to all from snowy Golden, CO.!

You may only download this image to demonstrate post-processing techniques.

Kathy: We have this same rose in our back garden so this is one of my favorites. I like your comp and color rendition especially. :+1::clap:>=))>

Hi Kathy. I like the composition and the color is awesome. I do wish that more of the rose was sharp, though I’m not familiar with Georgia O’Keefe’s work except in passing, so that may have been her style.

Hi Bill

Thank you. This rose species sure is striking. The colors are so intense, I did not think they would render well in a photo. That is one of the reasons I backed off in intensity.

Kathy

Hi Dennis
That is certainly valid. I actually picked this one after the fact to try and look like O’Keefe as I was stymied on what to do with it and she frequently dealt with very vivid colors. She mainly painted flowers, not photographed them , but she did such incredible things with them. I can see trying to emulate her in a photo using free transform and other tools on a flower to get them to be as ethereal as she was able to convey. Its really an eye opener to study her flower paintings. They are softer than a photograph though, but uniformly softer. I tried to soften the parts of this flower that were in focus as a result.

Thanks for the explanation, Kathy. I wonder if a soft focus lens would do better than software in this case?

Dennis
Good idea. I have thought of buying the Lensbaby Velvet 56, however, I am still in a learning curve with the Lensbaby sweet 50 that I bought 2 years ago. I tried one out at a trade show and they do deliver a nice soft “glow” but having the strength of the softness turn out the way you want it seems to be the trick. A difficult trick. You have to be able to see it through the lens as there are no focus cues.
Kathy

interesting. Things just keep getting complicated don’t they. I’ve never tries a lensbaby as I don’t tend to get into that style, but I have seen some interesting things done with them.

1 Like

Absolutely terrific… dont lose that lens…