Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Shallow depth of field: are we becoming obsessive about it?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

55% OFF new PortraitPro 12 - use code EPHZROS414.
Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 12:32 PM

I think the article is about a change in perception as to what is 'good' in photography. Once upon a time deep DoF was hard to get, so photographers used to pull all the stops out, and spare no expense to get it.

Now deep DoF is very easy to get with the very short focal length lenses used on small-sensor cameras. Therefore shallow DoF has become some sort of Holy Grail.... whereas once upon a time it was easy to get, with larger format capture areas and longer focal lengths, and it was therefore taken for granted.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
20 Jun 2012 - 12:32 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

llareggub
llareggub  3638 forum posts United Kingdom
20 Jun 2012 - 12:33 PM

What people choose to do with their pictures is upto them however I do skip over the "blur the living snot" out of it photographs, I've done a couple project 365's in recent years and it is a lazy way for me to grab a picture in less than ideal conditions when the thought of trying to get that perfect DOF for the image every day is too much work.

However I do see people that take 365 photographs of blurred the snot out of pictures and cannot work out what they are learning, but each to their own Smile

kodachrome
20 Jun 2012 - 1:18 PM

Depth of field has its place and can have good effect for approriate subjects. However done too often with out other formats to break up the monotony can become boring and smell of 'Look how clever I am'. I say chose your subject carefully for shallow depth of field but not at the expense of other settings.

ade_mcfade
ade_mcfade  1014554 forum posts England216 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 2:13 PM

Its an interesting little read there....

The word that is most responsible for these shallow DOF shots is "distracting"

People say this on just about any shot where there is something other than the subject in the frame...

So a natural reaction of people is to avoid these "distracting features" of a shot, and one way is to go blurry with the background.

You need to make your DOF decision on a case by case basis really... many times, the background is a bit rubbish so blur away. Others, it may add to the shot... imagine a nice portrait on Lindesfarne... may as well get the castle in the background?

All my early studio stuff was shot between F11 and F16

Strobist... well due to battery life, tend to be a bit kinder to the batteries and shoot as wide as I can given the ambient light. Gets annoying waiting 5 seconds for a full burst of flash to recharge...

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1214393 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 2:16 PM


Quote: Now deep DoF is very easy to get

Depth of field ? as in shallow or great CB.

I do think people are becoming somewhat lazy regarding composition, looking for a quick fixes, you hear it all the time, the backgrounds distracting, use a shallow dof with no talk or consideration for layering a comp.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 2:22 PM


Quote: Now deep DoF is very easy to get


Quote: as in shallow or great CB

Er, I said "deep" meaning the opposite of "shallow", Paul! Wink

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1214393 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 2:30 PM

Lol Smile

Gets confusing with all these people talking about depth of field without using the words shallow or great

Overread
Overread  53745 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 6:16 PM


Quote:
The word that is most responsible for these shallow DOF shots is "distracting"

People say this on just about any shot where there is something other than the subject in the frame...

So a natural reaction of people is to avoid these "distracting features" of a shot, and one way is to go blurry with the background.


I would add that a larger number of people into photography are not coming to it from a strong artistic background. As such composition in a busy scene can be a very difficult thing for them and the use of shallow depth of field can greatly simplify the process and give them a clear, good result.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 6:44 PM


Quote: I would add that a larger number of people into photography are not coming to it from a strong artistic background. As such composition in a busy scene can be a very difficult thing for them and the use of shallow depth of field can greatly simplify the process and give them a clear, good result.

Interesting take, Alex. I can see what you mean, e.g. rather than (say) getting down low and thereby avoiding b/g distractions - and possibly getting a more interesting view - they may shoot from eye level and rely on blurring the b/g. That type of thing.

Overread
Overread  53745 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 6:48 PM

Exactly - also people with a reduced artistic background are more likely to copy what they have seen - which is whatever is going to be common in the market. As a result any style tends to reinforce itself.

Of course those who stick at it long enough and push their boundaries will branch out - however there will always be a ready and larger number of newer people starting up. Thus the common themes will remain and will shift at a much slower rate.

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1214393 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 6:58 PM

What gets me are the recommendations for fast primes, no one ever states the obvious, simply that you can use a shallower depth of field.

An extra stop or two can make a lot of difference to a viewfinder Smile

User_Removed
20 Jun 2012 - 7:27 PM


Quote: I wonder what the next fad will be?

Low viewpoints for landscape shots? Just guessing... Wink

Milky waterfalls perhaps?

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1214393 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 7:48 PM


Quote: Low viewpoints for landscape shots? Just guessing...

Already tried that, must have looked like I had me ear to the ground in the local cemetery Smile

Last Modified By Paul Morgan at 20 Jun 2012 - 7:49 PM
Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 7:56 PM


Quote: I had me ear to the ground in the local cemetery

Did you hear anything or................... anyone?! shocked-dark.jpg




Grin

StrayCat
StrayCat  1014207 forum posts Canada2 Constructive Critique Points
20 Jun 2012 - 9:50 PM

Well guys, I'm going to continue doing things the way I enjoy them, milky water, shallow DOF when I feel like it, and so on. I don't have an artistic background like you lot, and I do try to copy some of the best wildlife photographers in the world, or more precisely, do what they say is a good way to do things, and I have never been influenced much by what I read in this forum. Wink

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.