biglouis Posted March 29, 2008 Share #1 Posted March 29, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I took both these pictures today in London's Regents Park. M8 24/2.8 asph The first I took wide open a f2.8, hence the oof areas beyond the small patch of purple flowers. The second one I took hyperfocally with the aperture set to f/11 but infinity set to f8 on the scale. I can't decide whether the shallow depth of field shot works better than the deeper focus shot. Do landscapes work if a relatively large area of the background is out of focus? Critques and responses welcome. wide open [ATTACH]80665[/ATTACH] stopped down [ATTACH]80666[/ATTACH] Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 Hi biglouis, Take a look here Wide open or stopped down?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
David Monkhouse Posted March 29, 2008 Share #2 Posted March 29, 2008 Stopped down for me, the wide open would be work with alower camera angle... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 29, 2008 Share #3 Posted March 29, 2008 For me too, stopped down is better... the foreground is not so "striking" to deserve an OOF background... the stopped down variant makes it better to enjoy the depth of the green scenery. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JE Posted March 30, 2008 Share #4 Posted March 30, 2008 The first one--has greater atmosphere, lusher. But that might just be that the tree trunk on the left is larger in the first photo...in any case, I prefer the first one. JE Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted March 30, 2008 Share #5 Posted March 30, 2008 Big - I too prefer the lusher, more detailed look of #2, though in both, the sporting objects (they look like American football goal posts) in the background are distracting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alberti Posted March 30, 2008 Share #6 Posted March 30, 2008 The first one gets my votes. It depends on whar to say with the picture, but the line of trees gives a nicer move of the eye in no 1 that leads to the flower bed again. The second for me has no heart in the picture. alberti Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Olof Posted March 30, 2008 Share #7 Posted March 30, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) For this picture i also prefer #1, the background isnt so impressing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
odd Posted March 30, 2008 Share #8 Posted March 30, 2008 Hi The last one is the best for me. - OM Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted March 30, 2008 Share #9 Posted March 30, 2008 Landscapes should be stopped down, definitely, unless there is something really strong in the foreground. Stuart - those are rugby posts - a real man's game Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted March 30, 2008 Share #10 Posted March 30, 2008 Depends totally on what your intention was Louis and where you want to divert the viewer's eyes. I'm a complete believer in 'isolate and emphasise' and aperture settings are one of the prime ways to control this. If your image is a flower photo then the wider aperture will assist. If it's a grande vista of a field, then stop down. IMO, the background has no interest and is there to support the flowers, but only you know that. It'd help if you expanded on what your intent was. Nice images though. Rolo Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted March 30, 2008 Author Share #11 Posted March 30, 2008 Guys Thanks for all the opinions and valuable critiques. I was wandering lonely as a cloud when I came across this weird carpet of pink flowers, set amid a (man made) glade in Regent's Park. Now, the 24 Elmarit is the mother of all wide angles (imho) -you stop this mother down and everything from the tip of your nose to the horizon is rendered sharply (perhaps I exaggerate a tad). So, I did my usual shtick but at some point I must have absent mindedly opened it up while trying to increase the speed. The result is the shallow depth of field shot. What I intended was a landscape which caught the wonderful lush new greenery and the pretty pink flowers. What I captured was the pink flowers and to my mind an dreamy spring-like background. I think I like it better than a focused background (horrible Rugby posts and all). Anyway, just wanted to test the opinions of others. I am nothing if not persistent so I went back today and shot the same picture. This time using my 75cron to further isolate the foreground and compress and blur the background. Sadly, I don't think I got quite low enough to achieve a more conventional 50/50 split but I can still go back and try again! M8 cron75 iso320 f4 1/2000 PS I know there is flare in the background, I'll PS it out at some point. [ATTACH]80786[/ATTACH] Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.