Dr Klaus Schmitt
Well-known member
Yes, this is a red russian rose, and it is not shot in visible light.
Last edited:
-
Please use real names.
Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed
Firstname Lastname
Register
We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know! -
Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!
"The Rose!"
- Thread starter Dr Klaus Schmitt
- Start date
Rachel Foster
New member
Klaus, if I may, what were your goals in this shot?
Dr Klaus Schmitt
Well-known member
To show the invisible beauty that is hidden from our human eyes or to put it differently, to open up our perception,
that even a tiny insect may be able to see something we will never be able to see with our limited senses.
This is a shot using ultraviolet light only and a soft focus lens.
that even a tiny insect may be able to see something we will never be able to see with our limited senses.
This is a shot using ultraviolet light only and a soft focus lens.
Rachel Foster
New member
I like the idea but I think it lacks something you were trying to capture. I wish I could pinpoint what that was but it eludes me.
Dr Klaus Schmitt
Well-known member
I noticed in my exhibits that some have an issue with that "unnatural"
color of that rose. This "it can't be" hinders sometimes viewers to enjoy.
Maybe it is that....? Unfortunately you can't see the 3ft x 3ft print which
shows the velvety structure of the petals.
color of that rose. This "it can't be" hinders sometimes viewers to enjoy.
Maybe it is that....? Unfortunately you can't see the 3ft x 3ft print which
shows the velvety structure of the petals.
Rachel Foster
New member
I don't think so. I'm not sure what it is, but it doesn't stand out. It's pretty but lacks the wow factor.
Dr Klaus Schmitt
Well-known member
Well, it is the one which draws in the most visitors strange enough 
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, 1600
JULIET
'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.
Klaus,
Shakespeare considered a rose would be the same no matter what! For us too, the Rose is the sum gestalt all the wonderful roses we've experienced: the red ones that lovers give, the ones on funeral caskets, the white one's in the jacket of a dandy, a garland, all and more make up our ideas of a rose.
Your rose is not anything Shakespeare would have considered. It's observed differently in a parallel universe. We could call it Heaven Night Flower for it really seems to be part of a night sky.
Rachel,
This is no rose you have even sniffed!
This is the giant dark magenta state of being that insects inhabit.
We do not sniff as the insects do.
We do not have compound eyes as they do.
Each petal to them is a giant mass to explore.
What we do see is certainly divorced from the usual assumptions we have.
Even William Shakespeare would not recognize this as a rose but rather something from some herb garden of a witch from a cave in the bowels of the earth.
So what you are missing is everything! That's the idea, I think of looking at things in new ways. It's this which allows us, from time to time to obtain insights otherwise closed to us.
Asher
Rachel Foster
New member
Oh I agree it's pretty.
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Oh Rachel, I just knew you'd come around! After all, who can resist Romeo's Orphelia?
Asher
Dr Klaus Schmitt
Well-known member
Thanks for these nice words. Yes, "a rose is a rose is a rose" in this or parallel universes. From that same series and color adjusted to match the original color (don't forget that it is a monochromatic shot as UV has no "color").
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Thanks for these nice words. Yes, "a rose is a rose is a rose" in this or parallel universes. From that same series and color adjusted to match the original color (don't forget that it is a monochromatic shot as UV has no "color").
Beautiful, but does that velvet appearance come through with visble light?
Asher
Dr Klaus Schmitt
Well-known member
Not to that extent. UV light is about 1.6x shorter in wavelength, so this is also the increase factor in resolution (roughly) - the reason why the chipmaking industry started with lenses for green light (546nm) and now over the decades works with excimer lasers and special quartz fluorite lenses for deep UV "light" up to 193nm (factor 2.8x compared to green light).