Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

Hymenocallis littoralis

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

Beautiful, Barbara.

--
Al Reid

"Marutchi" wrote in message ...
Hymenocallis littoralis

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

"Al Reid" schreef in bericht
...
: Beautiful, Barbara.

I second that.

Max

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

I'll 3rd that & stunning to boot. Would make for really neat wallpaper.
Cheers Wendy

"Max from Holland" wrote in message
l.nl...

"Al Reid" schreef in bericht
...
: Beautiful, Barbara.

I second that.

Max

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

This is a beautiful flower Barb.

"Marutchi" wrote in message
...
Hymenocallis littoralis

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

Al Reid wrote:
Beautiful, Barbara.

Thanks Al.

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

Max from Holland wrote:


I second that.

thanks Max

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

Wendy7 wrote:
I'll 3rd that & stunning to boot. Would make for really neat
wallpaper. Cheers Wendy

Thank you Wendy.

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

Stinkweed wrote:
This is a beautiful flower Barb.

thanks Sharon, it sure is. :-)

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

Marutchi wrote:
| Hymenocallis littoralis

Excellent photos, Barbara.

LOL.... I'm still behind in looking at everything I want to look at.
Zaroga

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

I first saw one of these about a year and a half ago in Southern California.
Very impressive plant and you did an outstanding job of capturing it. My
shots could not get close to the depth of field needed as I was shooting
Kodachrome 25 film. The smaller sensor on digital really expands the depth
of field to get the whole thing in pretty good focus. Perhaps #2 is a bit
better in this regards as it is further away from the camera, or at least
not zoomed in as closely. Great lighting and you exposed perfectly. Nice.
I'd like to use this in my photo class if I may.

Aram

"Marutchi" wrote in message
...
Hymenocallis littoralis

Spider Lily-0568-3 of 3
 

Aram Langhans wrote:
I first saw one of these about a year and a half ago in Southern
California. Very impressive plant and you did an outstanding job of
capturing it. My shots could not get close to the depth of field
needed as I was shooting Kodachrome 25 film. The smaller sensor on
digital really expands the depth of field to get the whole thing in
pretty good focus. Perhaps #2 is a bit better in this regards as it
is further away from the camera, or at least not zoomed in as
closely. Great lighting and you exposed perfectly. Nice. I'd like
to use this in my photo class if I may.

thank you Aram, feel free to use it any way you can. :-)