|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 3/17/2008
|
Indeed, being close to the object raises the ratio of different distances to the lens, and thus we have more chances to separate them by focus. A good real macro lens and it could work for a soft fence.
Prisons have hard fences indeed, but our eyes can soften them by focusing something else.
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
Linda Imagefree
{K:72276} 3/11/2008
|
Yes I understand your question Nick. And I have to say that I'm very impressed with your diagram illustrating your point. And that's what I meant Nick that one would be very very close to the subject, once again I didn't explain myself, but I guess I thought it understood...sorry for that. I do think you're right when you say that the blades will need to be on the same plane. I think this is a good study and I am very interested in the outcome. But the fence has to be included in order to convey the feeling of prison, and I think the whole fence, but soft, very soft..then again if it's soft what kind of a prison is that...hmmm, oh well this could go on forever. I hope you got a good sandwich today...*smiles*...all the best Nick..:))
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 3/10/2008
|
Oh, now I get you right, Linda! Thanks a lot for the explanation about my point - it made it clear to me.
Surely I could get both blades in focus for a better look. But the more they are separated from each other in the direction of depth, the more the *whole* fence will be sharply focused too. And this os what I asked. How to get both blades in focus, but *only* a bit of the fence in focus too, leaving the rest of it softer. That means, if this should work, it should be exactly the other way around: Place both blades on exactly the same distance (depth) to the camera and go for an extremely narrow DoF! *This* could be what allows to exploit the tiny differences of distance to the lens that the different parts of the fence have. (I attach also a sketch of the two situations as seen from above.) Trying the other way around and making the distance of the two blades to the camera too different is useless if at the same time only a part of the fence should be in focus.
It is very very unlikely that the small distance differences of the different parts of the fence to the lens will be enough for having one part in and the other part out of focus, except of course if using some length with a huge maximum aperture that reduces the DoF to tiny values.
Another possibility that I think of now would be to try to get as close (really close, not zooming!) to the scene since this makes the ratio of the different distances bigger and thus perhaps more likely to manage to get different focus on the different parts of the fence. But this would demand a lens that is able to focus at such small distances - likely to be a real pure macro lens.
I'll have to try the latter rather, since the first possibility would mean an extremely expensive lens which for my T90 is both hard to find and rather out of range for me, i.e. somewhere completely outside DoF! ;-)
Nick
|
Geometric situation |
|
|
|
|
Linda Imagefree
{K:72276} 3/7/2008
|
I apologize for not being very clear Nick, I do not always explain things well.
You mentioned getting the picture right in the camera in the first place without those distractions. And I merely commented good point. Of course, I was taking in all of the other things you had mentioned about that in other comments and didn't explain that very well.
Well yes, I agree that it would be a challenge to do as I've suggested, but, and you might be right, but I do think it can be done, because if those 2 blades of grass are not on the same plane, and if they are/were...as the photographer desiring to take such a picture you could simply place one in front of the fence bar and one in back of the fence bar, thereby having them on different planes, then you can try different apertures to focus on the blade closeby, then the one farther away, or the fence, one could also use the Depth of Field preview feature on their camera if available. Bracketing is another option, and there are also programs that will calculate the depth of field. I just googled that and didn't find that but I came across this site, just looking at it quickly I thought it might be interesting.
http://www.berniecode.com/writing/photography/depth-of-field/
Well Nick possibilities are all around us. I hope I've explained myself, and if not que sera, sera. If I get a shot like that I will be sure to let you know...I do love the idea of the challenge...:)) and will be looking for the opportunity. All the best, Linda
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 3/7/2008
|
I din't quite get you, Linda - what exactly did I point out? Do you mean using the direct "see though the lens" feature? If this is the case, then it was more a conclusion than a point, in the sense of self-critiques.
Now, to take the two blades and the fence in focus is possible but how to take the two blades and only a bit of the fence in focus? The whole fence lies parallel to the plane of film and under the very limited width (narrow angle) all distances from any part of the fence to the lens are almost identical. I'd have to use a really huge aperture for getting such a narrow DoF that even the smallest distance differences are noticable through focus differences. And then it would be questionable if the two blades wiould still be both in focus since they also have some tiny distance difference to the lens. Is there any viable way to achieve such a goal? It would be very unusual indeed, but I don't know how to achieve that.
Thanks a lot for the reply and the suggestion!
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Linda Imagefree
{K:72276} 3/6/2008
|
Ah yes, the difficulty of getting the picture without those little extras with the intention of getting the shot in the camera. Yes, good point Nick, I hadn't thought of that...and yes, the skill has to be there. Honestly, I do think of that when taking pictures but I tell myself as long as I get my subject the way I want it, I can always crop or clone the unwanted parts. Zoos are a good example, another area where you have no control over settings and there are lots of obstacles to overcome.
I do like what you did with this Nick.
As far as the focus goes, I would get the two blades and just the bit of fence surrounding them, being sure to just have a hint of the rest of the fence, obviously it has to show or we'd lose the effect of this lovely image. But I think it's presence should be soft, and this is where the difficulty with macros comes in because when you are shooting such a narrow DOF and don't want everything (in this case the rest of the fence)in sharp focus, and the various parts of the subject are on different planes, then the aperture becomes very tricky. This is where bracketing would come in. And for me this is a real challenge.
I do love this image especially the light and gradation of tones, and your insightful comments, thanks Nick!! :) Linda
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 3/6/2008
|
Thanks a lot Gustavo!
It seems that the previous one had more definition, like Linda also stated.
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 3/6/2008
|
Thanks a lot again, Dave!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 3/6/2008
|
Thanks a lot for the in deoth going comment, Linda! The very narrow DoF was a mixture of intention and insufficient skill, I guess. It should be only the fence and the grass that are in focus, but I missed that. I should have used that invaluable little feature on the T90 that allows for a direct view though the chosen aperture.
Cloning off the small blade and the bit of fence was indeed a great idea (Attachment). Now I ask myself why I didn't see that before! It made the image more "integrated" without any intruders. But it means as a kind backward engineering that I should turn the camera a bit upwards and to the right at shooting time.
Many thanks for these suggestions, Linda! They are of big value to me!
Cheers!
Nick
|
CLoned off small blade and bit of fence accoring to Linda's suggestion |
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 3/6/2008
|
Thanks a lot, Parehan!
I am only glad that the wire was captured OK.
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
Gustavo Scheverin
{K:164501} 3/5/2008
|
En esta caso me gusta más la anterior....
Un abrazo!
|
|
|
|
Dave Stacey
{K:150877} 3/5/2008
|
I like this one equally as well, Nick!
Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
Linda Imagefree
{K:72276} 3/5/2008
|
Personally I love this shot Nick. Firstly because the gradation of tones from dark to light are soft and very very lovely!! The horizontal presentation is more pleasing to my eye too, maybe because of the simplicity, and because as you mention the distribution of the light. Yes very nice. But you don't have a lot of focus, The focus is on the one blade of grass in the golden mean, very good, perhaps intentional, but I think you should have more DOF to include the other blade as well. My other suggestion would be to clone out the small blade on the right bottom and the bit of something there on the left border.
A gorgeous image, well composed Nick!! I compliment you on the simplicity and the eye to see this.
I want to comment on your comment re: tele vs. macro but I will reply on that comment specifically.
A great day to you my friend!! :)
|
|
|
|
parehan .K
{K:27453} 3/5/2008
|
Fantastic perspective, Nick.! Stunning subtle metallic and the grass hues.. I Love this kind of photos..
Warm regards and hugs.
parehan
|
|
0 
