Phellinus pomaceus

Critiques [Translate]

•  
• JoseMiguel (5506)
• [2007-02-13 16:30]
• [+]

Hi Tanja,
You did a great documentation job here!
We can see this fungi from a very good POV, that shows clear details on their morphology, like form, color and subtle shine of the surface, thanks to the very good fill flash use.
And I don't know how, but you managed to get this effective composition in this triangular form, that also goes with the bark's form.
Congratulations and thanks for share it with us.
My best regards,
JM

•  
• Alex99 (18607)
• [2007-02-15 10:16]

Hi Tanja.
Very impressive picture, interesting POV and great work with flash. I like the details and colours of your shot so much. My best wishes and TFS.
Alexei.

•  
• Sarcodon (70)
• [2007-02-15 11:03]
• [+]

Hi Tanja,
good photo but it doesn't show Piptoporus betulinus (Bulliard 1788) P. Karsten 1881 that is very different!
Theses specimens belong to the Phellinus genus, without any doubt, even if it is impossible to identify the correct specie without to check microscopical features.
Besides, Piptoporus betulinus grows exclusively on Betula spp. (inde nomen) and your specimens are on different plant.

by
Marco DM

•  
• Hormon_Manyer (2654)
• [2009-03-16 16:06]

Hi Tanja,
Sorry for telling this, but Your 2nd ID specification wasn't correct, too. Phellinus pomaceus looks very different (see it in my gallery if interested). This is Phellinus robustus, very probably.
Technically not a bad pic at all, I like the way You show us the trama. Even flash isn't disturbing. Nice work, tfs.
Respectfully Yours from Hungary, László