Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
I'm fascinated by depth of field in photos. Is it regarded as wrong to only have a portion of a photo in focus? For example, if there was a long iron fence I would be tempted to take a photo at an acute angle and at f4.0 or less so that only a small part of the fence is in focus and gets blurrier as you look along it. In my (limited) portfolio I have a photo of a guitar looking along the neck with only the pickup in focus. A few people have commented that they would have used f16 or higher to get everything in focus, but that's not the effect I was looking for! I wanted the focus to draw people into the picture, and I think it works quite well.
So how do you people approach depth of field - do you always make sure that whatever you are shooting has all its bits in focus?
Neil
Quote: Is it regarded as wrong to only have a portion of a photo in focus?
Absolutely not!
Quote: So how do you people approach depth of field - do you always make sure that whatever you are shooting has all its bits in focus?
It all depends on the shot in question and your desired effect. I use focus (or lack of it) to draw attention to the parts of the image that I want people to look at.
If that means everything is in focus then so be it, if it means that I use a very narrow DOF then that is what I'll do.
No. I often try and make use of focus to highlight the subject of the image. As you know, you can use it to your advantage by selcting a wide aperture to throw parts of the image out of focus and this can be very attractive, as in your guitar image. It is also useful if you want to throw a cluttered background out of focus.
The only time I really try to get everything in focus is in wide landscapes.
How can it be wrong? Nothing's wrong in photography, you just have to learn how to achieve and present want you want to show. That includes knowing when to use shallow and deep depth of field to suit the subject.
I just took a look at your guitar shot and I think it works very well. Highlighting the pickup with shallow dof creates a focal point and adds depth and interest. It would be a flat and boring picture with everything in focus.
How you approach it really depends on if there is a subject to be seperated from the background. Portraits work well with shallower DOF to seperate the subject, landscapes usually benefit from much deeper DOF to show everything in detail stretching into the distance. Product photographers often use cameras and lenses with movements to use DOF creatively in different planes.
To be honest, I think using shallow DOF is actually harder to do than shoving the aperture to F16 and getting everything sharp.
why?
well first of all, you need to make sure that what you want to be in focus IS in focus...
example - use a 50mm f1.4 at f 1.4 to take a portrait. Getting the right bit of the face sharp can be tricky - a sharp nose can mean blurry eyes etc.
Next, you need to make sure that the sharp bit is interesting - as CB said above
Next - you need to work out how much DOF is needed for the effect you want... so you need to be creative enough to think about that in the first place... and then you need to know your lens theory enough to guestimate what f stop would give you that DOF.
So all in all, I'd say hats off to people who are creative enough to get great shots using shallow DOF. It's far more involved than taking landscapes at f16.
Quote: I have a photo of a guitar looking along the neck with only the pickup in focus. A few people have commented that they would have used f16 or higher to get everything in focus
It is sometimes the case that a blurred foreground is less acceptable than a blurred background. In the photo you mention, you have a blurred f/g and b/g in roughly equal measure.
Which (I am guessing) is why - to some - it may not look quite right.
I agree iwth ade - working with shallow depth of field is a very big challenge - macro work (even at f16) you have very little to work with and its takes skill and a lot of practice (not to mention strained arms or a good tripod) to get the depth in just the right place - even if you work with image stacking you still need that depth in the right place (miss a gap of depth out and the whole series of shots won't work)
The low light capabilities of large aperture lenses are not the only reason that people shell out a small fortune for them. The shallow depth of field that they afford is just as important to most photographers. I love the use of shallow focus, particularly in portrait and macro shots, you can really emphasise your subject in this way, blurring distracting backgrounds.
I have gotten into the (bad) habit of sticking to f/16 mainly for landscapes but of course this limits you quite a bit.
Agree with ade here F/2 is good but trickier when you have to think about focusing on one point...wait a minute... I agree with ade? The colds getting to me.
At last the the wolf man is talking sense!!!
it does make me laugh when you see people saying things like "fantastic DOF" on a landscape that's front-to-back sharp though...
with very little knowledge on technique and theory, that can very easily be achieved by anyone - it's the opposite end of the spectrum that's harder to do well. It's easy to do, but harder to do "well"... "well" being the key word.
We can all get an f2.8 and shove it in Av mode at 2.8 just as easily as we can at f16
it's just you've got the risk of cocking things up, missing vital shots, getting incorrect focus a F2.8
the biggest risk with landscape at F16 is different - that's getting poor light or a non-descript composition.
That's one of the reasons I've not really done much landscape in 2008 - it's just not as big a challenge any more.
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Login or Join Now
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Related Content
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
foliopic 'Movement' Competition
1st May 2012 - 31st May 2012
This month's competition theme is 'Movement' which can be interpreted in a number of ways. You could photograph an animal running, a person walking or a car speeding...
Featured Directory Listing
May's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
Interact
Photography Gallery Photography Forums Recent Forum Activity Members' Meetings Members' BlogsSearch ePHOTOzine
Having trouble or would like to make a suggestion? Create a report
Calibrate your monitor so you can see 16 different shades.
ePHOTOzine © 2001 - 2012 Magezine Publishing | Contact Us | Site Map | Top