Sonchus oleraceus.
Milk thistle. We fed it to our rabbits. It's soft. It bleeds a milky sap like bitter lettuce; old lettuce. Before we ever got round to generations of selection. It arrives on the wind. It thrives. Goldfinch feast on those seeds and still there are more. Plenty. With no thought and no care it provides. And when our eyes are tired of seeing weeds and are surprised, the colours are pure and the shapes are radiant and the textures sublime.
When I see the date of my last blog entry - November 8 '18 - I realise it has been a very long time since I checked in here on the forum. Somehow it is easy to get lost when there are so many essential things that need time and attention. While 'luxury' parts of life just get shelved. Do we all put parts of our lives away in time capsules until easier days when we can return to them? Not that I should presume that I now have surplus energy to be 'back' and participate. I have a moment, so let's spend it in the garden, in autumn.
What a splendid time of year, in those magical latitudes (or altitudes!) that allow the light to become thin and clear, and the colours to become saturated and the air to ring like a bell. What a planet. How wondrous is life? We're so fortunate.
I so, so wish that I could capture what I see with my eyes and feel with my senses of touch and hearing. The vibrations of light and sound that encompass form and define our world like an ocean shapes the shore. But alack, practice, more practice, has had to suffice. Fortunately I enjoy taking pictures, even if the results have a long way to go. And I do notice changes in my perceptions and approach that amount, in my eyes, to growth. So I hope you find something to enjoy in this collection of pictures.
Nerine filifolia
Euonymous alatus
Cyclamen sp.
Acorn.
Bromeliad.
Samara... aka maple seeds.
Crataegus berries.
Berberis.
Cotinus 'Grace'.
Erigeron.
Interspecific Clivia.
Isn't it wonderful when gardeners share the worlds they create and we can explore their paradise? What a gift!
A garden is an iteration of all that is good and beautiful (or tortured...unresolved!) in the soul of its creator: a very special thing. When you come into those places I think you're welcomed into the landscape of another human soul, and those places are incredible. Some are strictly regimented, some are wild, some bounteous, some spare, some a fiesta of colour, some subtle or subdued, some full of fun and folly, some stern... gardens are people in all their varied forms.
While I wish to expand my focus and capture more of those gardens we create, when I find myself with a chance to practice photography, I find myself focused on the floral vignettes. On the portraits of flowers and features more than their habitat. I still have so much to learn at this scale! Maybe, rather than the forest, I'll always find myself photographing the trees... even when it is the forest I wish to convey! Is the soul of a garden evident in each of its blooms? I wonder.
These pictures were all taken in a lovely garden near Hobart. One of those lovingly created places that feels special. As always, any comments are welcome. Let me know how you find these images - what works, what doesn't. I hope you enjoy!
So, I have been using Irfanview to edit digital pics and I'm struggling with how much of this editing business is really necessary or even an improvement to images. I'm not technically proficient and wouldn't really know how to begin with custom adjustments... so I'm using auto this'n'that. I'm sure I mentioned it before, but I'm still unresolved as to whether hitting "auto-adjust colors" is a good idea. Help!
Here are some before and after images. They are all resized/resampled to reduce file size, but other than that the only difference is the application of auto-adjust colours. Which is better?
I have a hard time liking the adjusted images - why?
Hmmm....
Even though I think the auto-adjusted images are often (not always!) closer to the colours I was seeing with my eye, I also feel as though they are too garish. Are they, in fact? Or is this feeling a product of seeing the raw image first and having that imprinted as the 'real' image. If no one saw the raw image, would they find the adjusted one garish? Are we all just so used to seeing digital images that are made to 'pop' that we expect images viewed on screen to be super-real?
Or maybe it's a sensory perception thing - a kind of aversion to things that are 'too bright' for the individual? Are they too bright for anyone else? And yet, bright does not automatically equate with harsh. Maybe the quality shift in question is soft to harsh. Because bright alone is not a problem... in fact I would love to capture bright, luminous, true colour. How does one do that? Is it something captured in the raw image or a product of sophisticated editing?
Oops - that's a tangent! So, to pop or not to pop? Or opt for soft pop? woah... that was pop corn. If you're still reading, sorry! If you can tell me your taste in pic-pop, a gracious thank you.
You know what it's like. You're just doing your shopping. Really. Just groceries. Maybe loo roll. Impulse chocolate. That's all.... But there they are. Those bright, beguiling, smiling eyes.
Daisies. Osteospermum. Each year they flock to supermarkets to prey upon weakened shoppers - gardeners. Gardeners going about their weekly chores in the mundane world, deprived of the supportive colour, leaf forms and scents of their home; flooded with a sea of disorienting marketing and bipbips.
"Hey there!" They call. "We'll save you! Grab us! Wheel us round in your trolly. Look at us! Talk to us! Take us home! C'mon... you know what'll happen if you don't... pssstttt... they don't water us here" :'(
And, well... before long you have a collection. Because you can never have too much sunshine in life. And daisies are awesome.
