Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 188 of 337 FirstFirst ... 88138178186187188189190198238288 ... LastLast
Results 1,871 to 1,880 of 3363
  1. #1871
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by Bup View Post
    Real nice.
    Did you let it shoot continuously(sp) for a few frames or did you manage to without a tripod get the dof that right? Considering that if a baby ant had walked into your boot, it (the in-focus part of the scene) would have flown 4 meters to the left. It seems that one can either choose to get a too-narrow focus field, or too few pixels covering the scene subject.

    Or maybe I just breathe really heavily all the time
    I shot a few frames in AF and they were all off so I switched to MF and got this one. I don't usually bring a tripod on the hiking trails so do have to take many shots to get the one that I want. I usually go hiking with my brother-in-law, his 7 year old daughter, my 6 year old daughter and a 6 month old puppy. A tripod doesn't mix well with all of this action!
    -Paul-
    Canon 7D - Canon 17-55 IS USM - Canon 70-200mm f/4 IS - Canon 50mm f/1.8 - Sigma 30mm f/1.4 - Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 - Canon 430EX II Speedlite


  2. #1872
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545

    Lightbulb Dealing with Depth of Field (DOF) & Camera shake

    Quote Originally Posted by jsolack View Post
    Sorry for the huge picture!

    Here's my post again:

    Hello all, i'm new to all this so i'm hopin i can get some pointers from you all. This is my first try at doing a little photo editing in GIMP - so input on what i've done wrong is greatly appreciated!



    Taken on an a300
    F4.5
    42mm
    iso400
    1/3 sec exposure
    no flash

    Thanks again
    Okay, first off, the focus appears to be on your little one's elbow. At the aperture you are using, the depth of field (DOF) is rather shallow, making everything from his elbow out of focus (OOF). But since everything looks a little shaky, I am assuming this is "hand held" and there is a darn good chance you are dealing with 'camera shake', even though you believe you are 'rock steady.' The internal SSS (Super SteadyShot) can only provide up to around 1/15th of a second stability, after that, the camera's ability to deal with the shot becomes rather "iffy."

    There are a few approaches to solving this:
    1. (Best solution) Refocus on the subject's face, preferably the location of the eyes.
    2. Speed up the exposure to at least 1/15th second so SSS has a fighting chance to work.
    3. If you need to have the aperture this wide, backing up will expand the DOF.
    4. Tightening the aperture to f/8 or f/11 will also get more of the shot in focus, but you will require a whole lot more light than you are using to keep the same exposure ... or sacrificing the level of noise in the shot, up the ISO to 800 or 1000.


    Let's face it: Shooting with little to no light is hard on a camera. You need to up the ambient light (light in the room) until the following settings give you what you want.
    • Focal Length: 43mm (I am assuming you are using the "kit" lens = DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6)
    • Aperture: f/4.5 (this is widest aperture and a 'forced setting' at this focal length, using the "kit" lens)
    • Shutter Speed: 1/15 sec (So that SSS has a reasonable chance to stabilize the shot)
    • ISO: 800 (at least this, for this kind of indoor shot)


    These are minimal settings for an indoor, "hand held" shot. For this kind of subtle lighting, I highly recommend the use of a tripod .. because, then you can go longer with exposure times and get a better overall shot. Plus, the subject is NOT moving. You have a luxury not afforded to the "waking hours."

    Once again, focus on the eyes. That is usually where people look first, when they see a human or animal subject.


    Good luck ... and try again!
    Last edited by DonSchap; 08-28-2009 at 08:08 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  3. #1873
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    4
    Thank you very much for the detailed response!! That is great info - hopefully i'll come away with better images using your advice.

    Thanks for helping me through the learning process!

  4. #1874
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Carlsbad CA
    Posts
    523
    don and his hour long paragraphs............... only kidding
    The softness of the picture is cool except the face needs to be in focus. like everyone else is saying make sure you have light before shooting or use a tripod. Manual focus comes in handy also but it is a pain when im lazy also.
    Or there are plenty of good lens under $400
    sony A300
    tamron 17-50 2.8
    Sony SAL 11-18
    Sony 35 1.8

  5. #1875
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario
    Posts
    1,903
    Quote Originally Posted by jsolack View Post
    Thank you very much for the detailed response!! That is great info - hopefully i'll come away with better images using your advice.

    Thanks for helping me through the learning process!
    When I shoot my son, I normally focus on the eyes using any of the 11 AF point available to me and shoot.
    However when I use my flashes remotely, things appear a little too sharp, so most of my baby photos are intentionally softened in Lightroom. I normally use around -20 to -40 on the Clarity slider and doesn't affect the sharpness of the eyes too much!
    Canon EOS 7D

    flickr
    FLUIDR

  6. #1876
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545
    Quote Originally Posted by shoeytennis View Post
    don and his hour long paragraphs...
    Hey Brian ... you in a hurry? Why not a detailed explanation ... eliminating further questions, if possible? If I can go through the pain of producing it ... certainly, taking the time to read and understand it must be reasonable. My fingers are not all that fast.

    I figure a new member deserves some background ... initially. After that ... shoot, shoot .. and shoot, again!
    Last edited by DonSchap; 08-28-2009 at 08:14 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  7. #1877
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Elisha82 View Post
    When I shoot my son, I normally focus on the eyes using any of the 11 AF point available to me and shoot.
    However when I use my flashes remotely, things appear a little too sharp, so most of my baby photos are intentionally softened in Lightroom. I normally use around -20 to -40 on the Clarity slider and doesn't affect the sharpness of the eyes too much!
    Thank you for the input... i really admire your shots... your images really seem to pop off the screen. Any advice you can give on how to achieve such vibrant pictures?

  8. #1878
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario
    Posts
    1,903
    I have a bunch of custom configured Presets in LightRoom which I use and tweak to my liking.
    I leave the default sharpening that LR applies to th RAW file which I believe is 25 over 1 pixel mostly because I forget to reset it back to 0. I deosn't seem to have much effect on the RAW file anyway.
    And I almost always soften portraits especially when I use flash.
    I also sometimes use the Spot Removal tool in LR to remove spots and skin imperfections. And use the adjustment brush to darken or brighten areas as well as whiten teeth and so on.
    The graduated Filter gets used if my background looks blown out or if i want the sky to look better.

    After that I export the RAW to Photoshop and attempt some cloning if need be or even the Spot Healing brush again.
    I also on occasion use USM at 100% with 1-1.2 pixel but most times this is not needed if you already have good lighting and your focus is spot on unless you really want to sharpen the image more than it appears.
    I also use Noise Ninja if need be most on higher ISO images.
    But most times I just skip the USM and do a Local Contrast Enhancement which is also done via USM but the values are 15-20 and pixel is set to 50. This is what gives the image somewhat of a POP effect.
    Then I save the 16bit TIFF and also convert to 8bit and save as a jpeg.

    That's pretty much my workflow. I have yet to mess with layer masks and such but I'm sure that will open up a whole different level of Post Processing.
    Canon EOS 7D

    flickr
    FLUIDR

  9. #1879
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Carlsbad CA
    Posts
    523
    Don-The only thing I meant by it was that it seems like ti was way to much info and complicated if he is just a beginner. Maybe some baby steps is all.
    sony A300
    tamron 17-50 2.8
    Sony SAL 11-18
    Sony 35 1.8

  10. #1880
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545
    Oh, alright ... don't ask for a short blurb from a Encyclopedia. That's TLI (Too Little Information) LOL
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •