Depth of field
I've spent some time today looking up articles
on the internet on photography - depth of field
in particular. I've noticed with my present
camera, the Canon 350DSLR, that I'm having more
problems getting the depth of field right in a
lot of my shots (compared with my previous one,
the Olympus C-5060).
I've been using the automatic exposure settings
on my camera so far, and have yet to try out
varying the aperture-priority mode settings ...
partly due to laziness on my part and partly
ignorance also. I've learned today that using
a smaller aperture (but higher f number) will
increase the depth of field, with generally
better results, though this is not always the
case.
What I need to do next is to buy a small
handbook on how to handle this camera (I've got
one in mind by Charlotte Lowrie). I will have
a look at Amazon straightaway after this.
In the past few days I've been taking lots more
photos... here are a couple of my better ones.
You will see that the forget-me-nots towards
the back on the left hand side are slightly out
of focus, owing to limited depth of field.
However, I'm pleased with how this photo turned
out. The yellow rambling rose belongs to our
neighbours, but it's cascading over into our
garden ... it's a huge splash of colour in the
corner of our garden.
on the internet on photography - depth of field
in particular. I've noticed with my present
camera, the Canon 350DSLR, that I'm having more
problems getting the depth of field right in a
lot of my shots (compared with my previous one,
the Olympus C-5060).
I've been using the automatic exposure settings
on my camera so far, and have yet to try out
varying the aperture-priority mode settings ...
partly due to laziness on my part and partly
ignorance also. I've learned today that using
a smaller aperture (but higher f number) will
increase the depth of field, with generally
better results, though this is not always the
case.
What I need to do next is to buy a small
handbook on how to handle this camera (I've got
one in mind by Charlotte Lowrie). I will have
a look at Amazon straightaway after this.
In the past few days I've been taking lots more
photos... here are a couple of my better ones.
You will see that the forget-me-nots towards
the back on the left hand side are slightly out
of focus, owing to limited depth of field.
However, I'm pleased with how this photo turned
out. The yellow rambling rose belongs to our
neighbours, but it's cascading over into our
garden ... it's a huge splash of colour in the
corner of our garden.
posted by justin at 9:26 pm
.JPG)
8 Comments:
I saw an interesting idea on a flickr group the other day. Effectively 'Setting of the week' Chose a mode, aperture priority,shutter priority or whatever and take ALL your pictures in that mode for an entire week. I DO like the way you can see what the settings were for a pic with EXIF data. Cranking up your ISO(ASA equiv) will give you more sensitivity and allow a smaller F stop say f8 to f16 in those lower light areas. ISO400 on a camera like yours should have negligible noise.(Personally I just use ISO400 when needed and the cam sits on ISO100 normally) One of the most useful DOF theories I try to remember is 'from the point of focus, one third forward is sharp, and two thirds back' While lots of depth of focus is useful, shallow focus can be equally nice as in this pic I happened apon yesterday. Check out 'more properties' down on the right. Evidently a wide lens, probably macro focus?, with some throttled back? fill in flash, and a low ISO100 to assist shallow depth of field, which meant the cam chose f2.8. Enjoy your experimentation.
what lovely flowers I love a garden full of flowers and nice green plants. I wish I could have them in my garden. Have you googled about the Loerie bird
edt: thanks for all your helpful comments. I'm a newbie to some of these camera terms, like f stop, so it will take me some time to become familiar with using them. On my previous two cameras, I did experiment with the ISO settings and found I had more "noise" with ISO400 in low light settings.
I'm not keen on using flash, though I've read that red-eye reduction flash is good for "fill-in" of subjects in shadow on sunny days. I will have a go with what you suggest with one camera mode per week, to see what happens.
WLF: we've got a lot of flowers here, but they are not very photogenic. For example we're inundated with forget-me-nots, which grow like weeds, but I took the photo of the ones in shade,in my mother-in-lew's garden nearby.
I have Googled the Loerie bird and have found several types - are you referring to the grey/gray one? Do you know of a website where I can download the sound of one (on an mp3)?
Lovely blog!
Hi Justin I used to think that depth of field was how much you could dig into it that was untill I got my first 35mm camera an old second hand Praktika MTL3 served me well that did, had a Karl Ziess lens on it.
now what I learned was this if you want the background faded out open the appeture fully with about a shutter speed of about 250 that will make the background hazy, if you want depth of field close it up and take a shutter speed of about 500 that will take it so you can see all the way back to the shot.
flash and red eye, well buy a flash to go on the camera and bounce it that way you will lose any shadow and really lose any red eye as the flash is not in the victims face.
finaly enjoy your pictures no matter what they turn out like lets face it its cheaper now with digital than having to wait for all your films to be developed and throw all the crap ones away.
I just use a Kodak 3.1 mega pixel one now but it does the job for me, just fits in my pocket.
Betty: thanks for kind comment. I've had a look at your blog, and your style reminds me of Ulysees (your favourite book) ... remarkable stuff, I've never read a blog like it. I thought your brush with the police was a sad story.
Steve: thanks for your advice. I'll carry on taking lots of pics.
Forgive me for blathering on about DOF, but coincidently I'm battling it a bit at the moment too, as you can see here, would have liked some of the wooden plates to be tack sharp from front to back. I was enjoying a browse through your Mallorca in April 'set' at flickr yesterday and came across this pic, personally I rather LIKE the shallow DOF, the soft foreground and softening background focus the eye, and adds character. We have just had the second series of Rick Stein's French Odyssey, his culinary travels through Southern France by Canal. A most enjoyable TV series. I bought the cookbook of the series,and as an aside, it has some interesting landscape and food photography, the latter with very creative shallow DOF. Have a look at some samples of the photographer's work here.His approach to food on a plate is refreshingly different, and the cherries look spectacular.DOF I guess is 'horses for courses' and an element of personal taste. Keep up the good blogging/photography, from grey winter days here its enjoyable to see your summer images.
edt: thanks for your brilliant comments. Yes, I was pleased with that photo of the mauve flowers, as I was aiming to show them off as a carpet of colour. I thought that the shallow DOF used for the food photos was very good, as you say.
I find it difficult to take good food shots. I prefer natural lighting, which is often not available at the times when I'm cooking. However I was pleased with the photo of the bananas and mango, that I took in early morning light.
Post a Comment
<< Home