depth of field

depth of field

Robyn

Focused on depth of field today, found I prefer a closer up look though have included a far away one that I did appeal (no 4)

Wasn’t too sure with activity 2 & 3 whether I was meant to move from where I was to the subject as well as moving the lens, so I played around with both.

Image 1 – iso 64, F5.1 and 1/140.
I liked how the close up of Mariah and the slight pink colour to the left

Image 2- iso 64, F12.0 1/14
Mariah was contemplative here, at the time I thought it softer to sit her in the shadows and change my iso, but now I’m wondering was it too shadowy?

Image 3 – iso 63, F4.2 1/120
really like the lighter look of this one and the brightness of the two girls together, except really disappointed that part of Siena was cut off. Truth was she wasn’t my subject but inserted herself and the camera caught the moment

Image 4 – 64, F3.1 1/200
this one was taken from a distance without zooming in much, I like it on one way as it draws the eye in a little and gives a good idea of the backdrop, but I do more prefer close up photos

Image 5 – 64, F7.1 1/60
once again a sweet one of two sisters together.  Although part of Mariah’s head is ‘cut’ it appears natural (but sheer luck)

deep field 1 deep field 2 deep field 3 deep field 4 deep field 5

3 Comments

  1. Regarding your question about activity 2 & 3 – you can do it whichever way you like. The idea is to get a feel for how aperture, distance and zoom (focal length) all work together to control depth of field
    Now for some feedback:
    Image 1 – Nice image but a little tiny bit under exposed (a bit dark). Do you remember which metering mode you were using? This may have impacted on how the camera judged the exposure.
    Image 2 I like this one. However there are a few things to look out for in future. Your shutter speed was way too low. 1/14 means that her hands are a blur where she has moved. If you’d used a larger aperture (smaller number) you could have increased your shutter speed to at least 1/60 which should be enough to eliminate camera blur. Also would have given you a softer background to eliminate some of the distractions from the light and shade of the trees. Also be careful under trees where spots of light peek out from between the branches/leaves. Mariah has some shadows and hot spots (bright spots) on her arm.
    Image 3 – Also disappointed that part of Siena was cut off. But that’s the reality of photographing kids – they move 🙂
    Image 4 – I also prefer the close up photos. But this is a good exercise to help you to see and compare all possibilities.
    Image 5 – I also like this one. But the same as the first it’s a tad under exposed. You also have some camera blur on Siena’s hand which you shouldn’t really get at 1/60. Perhaps your camera requires a faster shutter speed to eliminate blur – worth doing some more testing on that.

  2. Robyn
    I realised later I didn’t do this exercise correctly as I couldn’t find the metering button, since have found the button and redid the exercise and emailed you far better quality pics.
    and now it GET it!! such a difference:)
    Oh thanks for the aperture tip! in pic 2. and I hadn’t even noticed the bright spots until now.
    Image 3 – I know, upset too, funny part was actually Mariah was meant to be my subject and she came on in.
    Oh yes my shutter speed has been so slow for so long.
    So is 1/60 a good average place to start?

  3. Yep, 1/60 is probably the slowest I’d advise you to go if you are hand holding the camera. Any slower and you will get camera shake or movement blur. You could use a tripod to avoid camera shake but you’d still get movement blur if your subject moves.

Leave a Reply