February 12th, 2011: Passion Flower 'Sherry' (Passiflora ) by atisch

The Bloom of the Day for February 12th, 2011 was Passion Flower 'Sherry' (Passiflora ).

View the bloom of the day here: http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/botd.php?date=2011-02-12

The color on this one is outstanding!!

Beautiful! Takes my breath away! Love the light effects in this photo

wonderful bright color for this dreary morning... love it

Beautiful!! I was always turned off by passiflora (maypop) because they grow wild here. We used to have maypop battles. When the fruit gets ripe and before it falls off, pick them off and throw them at each other. If they are at the right stage of ripeness, they will SPLAT!! the other person!! But this is just beautiful. Hmm....maybe I need to reconsider.

Beautiful shot! The camera sure captured the true red of this Passie;o)

I need to find out what camera took this. So many screw up red, this is perfect. How could you not want one of these twisting all over your garden?

Luciee, I think a lot do not fruit, at least I have had many that did not.

Kell, I've been given to understand that you have to have a male and a female to fruit. You can probably look it up on the internet. Yes, a good camera took this shot. Mine is not that good. Luciee

Kell-if you find out about the camera, please share the info. I would love to know....

Luciee, that makes sense. Though the flowers should be different than on each. I will have to look in to it.

Phoebesviolets, I saved the picture than looked at its properties. It says it was taken by a
Canon Powershot SD980IS. Gee my little Canon 950s and my big T2i does not do as good at all!

I have a Canon Powershot! LOL! Mine is A590IS--And it does a pretty good job for the price. Gonna google the SD to see the difference.Thanks.

Thanks to all of you for your very kind comments on my photo of Passiflora Sherry. It was taken with a Canon Powershot SD980 IS and was taken on it's widest angle setting. While I did some exposure and light editing in ACDSee, the color was not touched in any way. I find this Canon is very capable in capturing true reds of any intensity, but tends to emphasize blues in flowers that are in the lavender and purple range. This is quite different from my experience with shooting film.

I've just recently upgraded to a DSRL--a Canon Rebel T2i with a Tamron 18 to 270 mm macro zoom--which I'm spending quite a bit of time trying to learn how to use it to greatest advantage. I intend to also keep using the Powershot camera.

Thanks again,

Allan

Hi Allan. We all loved your photo!

I had the Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD LD Aspherical IF Macro Zoom Lens but just returned it. I just could not get the photos to even be sharp. I replaced it with the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM but my photos as still not as good as they were with the cheaper kit lens which I broke. I am debating returning it too. Though it could all be me for I have no clue! LOL My photos from it seem lackluster especially compared to what my old Sony produces.


On my recent trip to Florida, I used all 3 of my cameras and my best shots came from my Sony. I am wondering why lug around a big heavy camera and lens when a smaller Sony did so much better! I so need to take a class.

Kell,

It is pretty amazing how well many compact digital cameras can do with macro photography. You've taken some stunning photos over the last several years. Excellent!

So far my Tamron lens seems to focus quite well, but I'm still evaluating it. After trying two lenses, especially with the Canon EF-S, I'd almost suspect that the problem may be with your DSLR body. Have you tried any photos focused manually? The only other thing that comes to mind is that I was surprised by how far the minimal distance from a subject is compared with the little Powershot. With the latter I can get within a few inches, but the closest I can focus with the Tamron lens is almost a foot--I think its rated at 10 inches.

I agree that when traveling it's harder to justify lugging a DSLR camera around compared with a compact digital camera. I plan to still rely on my Powershot quite a bit away from home. Even at home when I want a wide-angle effect like with this Passiflora I'll keep reaching for my Powershot.

Best, Allan

What an amazing photo of that beautiful Passiflora bloom!

It could be my camera, or could be me! LOL. All of sudden I could not auto focus with my kit lens.. it just made the worst sound. I have recently heard from a friend that Canon may fix it for it is/was a common problem. I have to check with them. I did get good pics with my cheap kit lens before it died. Much better than now with a more expensive one. I am getting better pics with my new lens now but still not ones worth $1000. I may see if I can return this one and take another home.

I should check your pics and see how they are with your new Tamron lens. Did you get the one with the new PZD, Piezo Drive (PZD) technology? It came out in December. It sounded so good on paper and had such a wide range. I wish I could have gotten a decent shot with it.

I do get great macros with my little Canon S90. But I had tiny, tiny seeds in my pocket and stuck my camera in and now it has some issues. LOL. I go thru cameras quite quickly! But it still takes great macros, so much better than my T2i. Example

Kell,

Your photo above is...well delicious!. I agree that you can get superb pics with a good compact digital camera. I have no intention of retiring my 12Mp Powershot. I did consider the new piezo drive Tamron, but went with the bulkier lens. I'm still second-guessing that decision, which had to take total cost into account. But I am pleased with the 18-270 lens and glad that I opted for the Vibration Control version, which is worth every penny and then some. I did read that it takes more battery power, but that doesn't seem to matter much. Even after a few hours my battery still indicates "full".

I haven't posted many pictures on DG with the T2i, but there are a few at the orchids forum:

http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/fp.php?pid=8375898
http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/fp.php?pid=8375861

The Nasturtium shown here shows the marcro capability. This was hand held and manually focused.
This is perhaps the best example so far of something I haven't been able to do before. I'm still just experimenting with it.

Allan

All 3 sure are bright! So it is the detail of the nasturtium bloom that you couldn't get before? Your passion flower above has equal detail don't you think?

Kell,

Not at all. I've been able to get excellent detail with the Powershot. The thing expanded here is the magnification. The other advantage is the ability to take macros over a wider range of focal points, from wide angle to long telephoto, which can make some difference in the impression one can get of flowers with larger, more 3-dimensional flowers (below). But I'd guess that I can do as well with the Powershot for over 80% of the floral pictures I want to take.

One good example of the type of flower that convinced me that I would like more capability was in the photography of Peruvian Brugmansias, like Brug. sanguinea and 'Vulsa'. These are Brugs that have longer, narrower trumpets and do not flare as wide at the opening compared to most Brug hybrids. Their main attraction for me is that they can have much deeper color, but can only flourish in very cool and mild climates like the SF Bay Area where I live. With the Powershot, when I get close to the flower lip the picture gets distorted...(much like a face does when a wide-angle shot is take physically close...the nose looks disproportionately large) The brug's flare (foreground) looks much wider relative to the trumpet (background). This gives an extremely flattering photo, in that it looks much more like the traditional Brug hybrids, but its misleading. I discussed this effect in the Brug forum for photos of my Brug. 'Vulsa', particularly the posts on 12/23/10, where I also included photos from the side to show how my previous pictures were somewhat over-dramatized. In fact, I can only take pictures like these with the Powershot as I get much closer to the subject. Therefore the new camera system is more to complement the capabilities of the Powershot than to replace it.

http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/1145943/

The photo here was taken with the new DSLR. This isn't one I was planning on posting, but it does better show the flower as one sees it.

I hope this makes some sense,

Allan





This message was edited Mar 3, 2011 12:21 PM

I see what you mean! So you are into brugs! I used to live on the Brug Forum! I haven't seen your Brugmansia Strybing 'Vusla' at the Strybing. Are they growing it there and did you get it at one of their sales? So pretty!

An Alan in England has the best colors! But I did see and did try unsuccessfully to propagate a so beautiful one I saw in Mendocino last year. It was colored the full length of its so red skirt. I always have been fond of corollas that maintain their color up to the calyx. Much like yours! LOL

So which is that sweet apricot one?

I was mildly interested in Brugs until I discovered sanguinea, vulcanicola and their hybrid Vulsas. When I saw a large deep red Brug in Mendocino last summer (pictured here), I became totally hooked. I've since learned that it's the variety 'Inca Queen', and there is debate as to whether it's a pure sanguinea or contains a small amount of vulcanicola. The beauty you show above looks like the same variety.

I got my 'Strybring Vulsa" from an avid Brug enthusiast who lives in Pacifica, who in turn got it from Strybring. It's color changes between apricot and orange tones as it ages and seems also somewhat dependent on the temperature, but it's always beautiful.

I am familiar with Alan Hurstwood, from England, and have to agree he has the most stunning cool-growing hybrids. I'm currently on his waiting list for seeds. He, in fact, recommended the Tamron zoom lens to me...small world!

Kell, what cool growers do you have. I'd love to trade cuttings. [Please contact me by d-mail.]

Best, Allan

LOL! I bet it is the same sang we both saw! Was yours in front of Cafe Beaujolais? Here it is pictured on their website. You have to wait till the outside of the restaurant is pictured in the slideshow. http://www.mendocino.com/?id=895&url=www.cafebeaujolais.com

Who IDed it as Inca Queen?

I recently bought 2 sangs at a nursery. They had different leaves so I got suckered in. I bet one is the one Annies Annuals sells, so common around here. I should go out and look at the names. I would be thrilled if one was the all red one.

I also see one that has leaves that different. I will look for its pics. Berk. Biot has it growing and so does a friend in San Leandro.

Beware that sangs get virused so easily! And that is a sad day!

Sweet

LOL is right! When I posted pictures from this tree in the Brug forum (below), I eventually was contacted by grrrnthumb (from WA) by d-mail. He informed me that he had "served a few years as the ICRA Registrar for Brugmansia". I sent him the website picture with the address of the cafe. He has since seen the tree and then wrote with the ID along with some of it's lineage.

http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/1131139/

I got two seedlings myself from Richard Owen Nurseries, which first bloomed with just a couple flowers just after Christmas. They both boomed yellow, but I'm a bit suspicious as to whether they are true sanguineas as the flower shape are much fuller than I've seen. They'll be blooming again soon, so I'll get a better look.

Allan

Were they all yellow? I see on their website they are supposed to have a orange rim. I am going to dmail you!