If I’m ever going to get the rash associated with Poison Ivy, this should be the year. I’m reckless when it comes to getting a wildflower shot. A bit of color catches my eye and I’m off the trail, on my belly, kneeling, squatting – in the surrounding plants.
While this photo is from last August, I have just started seeing the tiny, shiny three-leaved plant poking out of the leaf litter. Apparently, the rash-causing oil urushiol is present in the hairy vines making it possible to get poison ivy even in winter.
Leaves of three – let it be.
Vines with hair – beware!
Maybe I’m one of the 15% of the population that isn’t allergic. At any rate, I’m going to keep diving into the underbrush to get wildflower pictures and I hope I don’t have to write a future post on my rash! Ha ha!
For the last couple of days, I’ve been experimenting with another of the lenses in the bunch Rachel has for sale. The one that intrigues me most is a 35-80 zoom from Canon which comes with a set of three “close-up filters”. I took these Long-spurred Violets and the Dwarf Ginseng below using the lens with no filter. (By the way, this ginseng is not the same plant as the one with all the purported aphrodisiac properties…)
It seems weird to call the attachments “filters” – but that’s what the instruction sheet says. They do screw on to the end of the lens just like a filter would. And you can cascade them for different effects. Unfortunately, the camera has no way of recording which combination of filters are screwed on to the end of the lens… So I’m going to have to try to remember… Oh boy. Here goes. I’ll just give you two photos that I’m sure about:
It was interesting to visit Long Point State Park again – only ten days after my last visit. The Bloodroot was done. The Dutchman’s Breeches still had blooms, but they were brown and withering. Really drives home the meaning of the word ephemeral.
For the Trillium below, I added the +2 filter, cascading it with the +4. I so love the effect! The anthers and the upper sepal must have been at the same distance from the lens bringing them both into focus. But the petals turned all dreamy and because they were outside of the depth of field captured by this lens combination. I wish I could say I did that on purpose. But it was purely a happy accident.
Going back to the 300mm lens. I do love the effects you can get with a longer lens, and I love that I can photograph things that are a little farther away. On Saturday, I used Rachel’s older 300mm, but also had the opportunity to use a newer model with image stabilization (thank you, Ann!). That spoiled me: I’ve decided not to buy Rachel’s 300mm, but to save up for a newer model. I hope she’ll let me buy the 35-80mm with the closeup filters! Many thanks to Rachel for letting me try before buying. Here’s one of my favorites from Rachel’s 300mm: