Unknown Pluteaceae for ID please

[Nettle Runner]

Sherwood Forest (Birklands) 7 June 2008
Found just two fresh specimen growing on a pile of wood shredding from recent clearances - probable silver birch.







Cap dia 50mm sticky
Stem 50 x 10-15mm swollen at base, not brittle
Smell slight
Gills not brittle

I thought it was a Pleurotaceae sp. but markings on stem confused me

Your comments and observations welcomed
Les

[FungiJohn]

Blimey Les, these look more confusing than mine

I think we need to invite Nick et al to a long weekend's foray at Clumber / Sherwood just to give us a start on the common ones

John

[Leif]

Pluteus cervinus, but with an unusually yellow tinge to the cap which might partially be an in-camera effect.

[mykonik]

Originally Posted by Leif

Pluteus cervinus, but with an unusually yellow tinge to the cap which might partially be an in-camera effect.

I agree Leif - Pluteus cervinus - immature, and just one of the numerous colour 'forms' of it.

PS Les - I think you meant to say 'Unknown Pluteaceae' didn't you (not Pleurotaceae !) ?

Nick

[Nettle Runner]

You caught me out again Nick. Like John says "I need new glasses".

Leif, I think that my use of fill flash has brightened up the colour in this instance. The flash usually helps in darker woodland situations, perhaps it was too bright for fill flash. I will have a further look at my non-flash images.

John, do I need to adjust the White balance to compensate, when using the flash? Or is it trial & error?

Having now looked in Courtecuisse & Duhem, I see that the stem markings are obvious for P. cervinus. Must also remember the radish smell, but it did not strike me as that at the time.

Thanks all for the help, I do learn so much more from your comments. But these common ones are so variable

Les

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by Nettle Runner

You caught me out again Nick. Like John says "I need new glasses".

Leif, I think that my use of fill flash has brightened up the colour in this instance. The flash usually helps in darker woodland situations, perhaps it was too bright for fill flash. I will have a further look at my non-flash images.

John, do I need to adjust the White balance to compensate, when using the flash? Or is it trial & error?

Having now looked in Courtecuisse & Duhem, I see that the stem markings are obvious for P. cervinus. Must also remember the radish smell, but it did not strike me as that at the time.

Thanks all for the help, I do learn so much more from your comments. But these common ones are so variable

Les

Hi Les

I wouldn't advise using flash for any fungi other than to enhance pores in large bracket fungi or certain myxies.

If it needs 15 seconds then give it 15 seconds! I do on ocassion use my multi LED lamp though ... well, when I remember to pack it that is I always use auto white balance (-2) and 'as shot' in CS3.

John

[Leif]

Originally Posted by FungiJohn

Hi Les

I wouldn't advise using flash for any fungi other than to enhance pores in large bracket fungi or certain myxies.

Oooh, I smell a good fight ...

Seriously though, I find that fill flash adds life to a photo that might otherwise be rather flat. I also find that using fill flash on my Nikon D200 seems to improve the white balance. I suspect the camera uses the initial flash pulse as part of the WB algorithm. Of course I might be totally wrong, and I've not heard from anyone else on this.

I have tried flash as the main light, and I don't like it. That said, I recall someone called Neville with the Hants Fungus Recording Group taking very nice handheld photos with a Nikon F2, macro lens and twin flash units on a bracket.

[Nettle Runner]

I'm with you on this one Leif.

Using the SU800 Commander and two SB-R200 heads set at -1.7 I find that the shadows under the cap are eliminated, without detracting from the main image, even when 15sec exposure is used (which is quite often).

I will have to give you a demonstartion, John. Not saying your pics need improving, by anymeans

Les

[FungiJohn]

Round 3

I would certainly agree that 'fill in flash' in certain situations can be beneficial but it can be a disadvantage when used with subjects which have subtle colours and a reflective textured surface.

I have seen the setup which Les has and it's excellent. It may be useful next time we are out together to do some comparisons.

There, the gauntlet is laid. See you at dawn on Lime Tree Avenue Les

Side bets anyone

[Leif]

John: It sounds like a characteristic of your camera. I use the built in flash most of the time and it is fine, though I sometimes use an off camera SB-800 for large fungi where I need better modeling. I find that fill flash brings out texture.

[NickCantle]

You and your posh flashguns, get yourselves a Metz Mecablitz CL45 WHAT A BEAST That's what I use sometimes

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by NickCantle

You and your posh flashguns, get yourselves a Metz Mecablitz CL45 WHAT A BEAST That's what I use sometimes

I'm a 'bare bulb flash' man myself ... you're too young to remember these Nick

[NickCantle]

Are they the ones that 'Smash when you flash'? That's not very environmentally friendly

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by NickCantle

Are they the ones that 'Smash when you flash'? That's not very environmentally friendly

Which is why I seldom use flash Ideal for warming your hands in winter though

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by Leif

John: It sounds like a characteristic of your camera. I use the built in flash most of the time and it is fine, though I sometimes use an off camera SB-800 for large fungi where I need better modeling. I find that fill flash brings out texture.

In my WAB fungi photography guide I wrote:

Flash Conclusion:

Always be aware that flash illumination may not be the correct method for certain types of fungi. Quite often the colours obtained may be different to the original scene. By experimenting with both natural available light and flash on fungi you will come to your own conclusions. Much depends on your own camera / flash capability.

and for most people in general I would still advise the same. In the end it's whatever works for you and the image you set out to achieve.

[Leif]

Originally Posted by NickCantle

You and your posh flashguns, get yourselves a Metz Mecablitz CL45 WHAT A BEAST That's what I use sometimes

You real photographers, I don't know ...

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by Leif

You real photographers, I don't know ...

It's a good job we don't use images to identify fungi

[Leif]

Originally Posted by FungiJohn

In my WAB fungi photography guide I wrote:

Flash Conclusion:

Always be aware that flash illumination may not be the correct method for certain types of fungi. Quite often the colours obtained may be different to the original scene. By experimenting with both natural available light and flash on fungi you will come to your own conclusions. Much depends on your own camera / flash capability.

and for most people in general I would still advise the same. In the end it's whatever works for you and the image you set out to achieve.

John: I agree with most of what you write, but not the first two sentences. Which fungi are unsuitable for fill flash?

In my experience the main problem with fungi is that they often have very little tonal variation and are very smooth, and soft lighting is the answer.

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by Leif

John: I agree with most of what you write, but not the first two sentences. Which fungi are unsuitable for fill flash?

In my experience the main problem with fungi is that they often have very little tonal variation and are very smooth, and soft lighting is the answer.

Hi Leif

In my own experience I've had problems with the smaller ... mycena, marasmius, some coprinus, Stropharia and Psathyrella species etc. I've certainly found no benefit when taking photographs of species such as eye lash fungi.

Your last sentence would certainly apply to many I've mentioned.

Again, it all depends on what you wish to record and what features you wish to emphasis or make clearer. This of course is coupled with editing the RAW file in something like CS3 to apply any final tweaks.

It works for me but may not necessary work for everyone.

btw I am very familiar with flash technique having used it extensively over 35 years in wedding, glamour and industrial photography.

John

[Leif]

John: Do you have an image which illustrates flash as being unsuitable? I am curious to see what you mean! Don't worry if it is not easy to fine one though.

I suspect it is the flash algorithm on your camera/flash that is the issue for some fungi, though that is no more than a guess. I don't like to push a camera brand, but Nikon are renowned for their flash, and my experience backs that up. (Unless used with a Nikon 85mm tilt shift micro lens bought specifically for fungi. )

[Nettle Runner]

Leif, here is an image taken without the flash. In retrospect, I think it was unnecessary to have used the flash, as the image is quite acceptable.

Love 15 to John:

Les

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by Nettle Runner

Leif, here is an image taken without the flash. In retrospect, I think it was unnecessary to have used the flash, as the image is quite acceptable.

Love 15 to John:

Les

That's a cracking image Les
John