I Still Haven’T Found - Can You Help Me With What I Am Looking For?

[David48]

I really want to post here ... I really do.

Previously I have looked at the many (technically brilliant) photos posted here and have been entranced by their beauty, the technical MasterPiece that is being presented.

Sometimes however, I feel that it becomes more like 'MasterChief' ... creating recipes that are far removed from the hustle and bustle of normal life.

I still haven't found a section here that screams David ... here is where you and your happy snaps belong. You will find comfort in posting without the imposing critical analysis of 'Evaluate my photos'

Maybe this space doesn't (yet) exist.

Previously I used to be a 'technical' photographer with my OM-2 then later and OM-10 ... but now my world is filled, not with beautiful photos ... but beautiful feelings.

If this Forum remains in the classical ballet mindset, I may never be given an entry ticket ... but maybe, if those who want to expand the joy and love of photography further in the masses, might see fit to loosen that constriction ...

Remember ... that photo captures a moment in time that is personal to you and ... with the right empathy becomes personal to others who share your joy.

Is this a technically masterful photo ... NO ... does it display warmth and a touch of intimacy ... I hope so.

EDIT ... my crap spelling

Edited May 5, 2012 by David48

[David48]

Or this ...

[David48]

or this ...

[BangkokImages]

David - There are many like you who wish to share their images.. I put up a separate User Gallery section on my site which allows you to post images in your own galleries and share them.. and forums to link them to for discussion if you wish. I'd like to extend an invitation to you and any other interested party to come take a peek and see if you find the site useful.

Btw.. I liked the first image you posted. You can almost feel the closeness. Very nice!

Steve

[BookMan]

or this ...

this a picture of u as a boy on the Brisbane river?

[David48]

or this ...

this a picture of u as a boy on the Brisbane river?

It was a very low king tide under the Story Bridge!

Edited May 16, 2012 by David48

[BookMan]

or this ...

this a picture of u as a boy on the Brisbane river?

It was a very low king tide under the Story Bridge!

Never know what you'll find in the mud with a very low king tide. Maybe some nice old bottles.

[Kan Win]

Posted 2012-05-05 12:36:55 David48

I really want to post here ... I really do.

So what do you want in simple and small words as your post above leaves me Khun-fused.

Now that is over, please find me version of your first photo below

[Kan Win]

I Still Haven’T Found - Can You Help Me With What I Am Looking For?

Yes sure.

Change your "Super Member" name to ........................

My OP is in the "General Fourm" how to do it and if you do have time please change your photo as it does not reflect your good self very well.

to the good "Lord Buddha" yes, however to a Monk, well, that leaves me speech-less, hence once I see your photo, I take a step back and try not to read your posts.

Sorry to have to say this to you who is still looking for, try pbase.com then.

Win

[David48]

Sorry to have to say this to you who is still looking for, try pbase.com then.

Kan Win, thanks for the suggestion, but I'm kind of happy in TVF.

You guys are my cyber family ... and I kind of like that.

Maybe I'll just continue to plug away here as no-one seems to mind ...

EDIT:- Kan Win, please don't take the above as a personal slur because I have much respect for you as a poster after reading what you wrote about ANZAC Day, and your great work here.

Edited May 18, 2012 by David48

[cdnvic]

or this ...

Technically masterful? No, it doesn't use the rule of thirds, and isn't centred well if you intended it that way. None of this matters though as you captured the subject at the perfect moment, and simple cropping can fix the rest.

A missed opportunity can't be framed well enough to look good.

[David48]

cdnvic ... how intuitive of you.

I did crop the original photo clumsily and quickly after I posted it realising that I had only 30 mins to edit it.

From the original, I felt that the background distracted from the message and soul of the photo.

Could you be so kind as to correctly crop the original photo and explain a few basic rules, if you have the time?

If not maybe you can post a web link where it's easily explained for beginners?

I've included the higher resolution version so please have the liberty to adjust the size ... just trying to give you the raw material.

EDIT:- ... I souldn't have been so lazy ... is there a topic here that you remember that discusses your point about framing?

All I know is to not split the horizon line.

Edited May 18, 2012 by David48

[cdnvic]

A quick overview of the "rule of thirds"

http://digital-photography-school.com/rule-of-thirds

Once you learn and practice it, you will find yourself using it without even thinking.

[cdnvic]

With the pic of the novice in robes above you can make him the focus of the photo and blur out the back ground by using a shorter depth of field. Depth of field is the measurment of how deep the focused area is in a photo. The higher the "f" number, the longer the depth of field.

For instance, in a shot where you want a photo of a temple complex to sharp and focused throughput the photo, you would use a high "f-stop" such as 16, 22, or the highest your lens is capable of. This will make the buildings and people in focus regardless of if they are 10ft or 100ft away.

If you wanted to make one person in that photo your subject you would want to use the lowest possible f-stop possible, preferably 1.8-3.5 so that only he is in focus, and the rest of the buildings blur into the background.

Keep in mind that distortion gets more pronounced at higher and lower f-stops, with f8 having barely any. Also, higher f-stops require much longer exposures as the aperture that allows light into the camera gets smaller and smaller, so high f-stops are not recommended for moving subjects.

http://www.artsphotographyschool.com/depth_of_field.html

[David48]

A quick overview of the "rule of thirds"

http://digital-photo.../rule-of-thirds

Once you learn and practice it, you will find yourself using it without even thinking.

cdnvic, I really appreciate you giving me the link and I have read it.

Now I know why I like ...

This .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. more then This

With the 'Rule of 3rds' applied as per what cdnvic points to.

Shame about the blue roof in the bottom left of the photo.

[David48]

Depth of field is the <snip>

Actually as I mentioned in the OP,

Previously I used to be a 'technical' photographer with my OM-2 then later and OM-10 ... but now my world is filled, not with beautiful photos ... but beautiful feelings.

For many years I shot in Film composing each shot ... because every shot counted and film and paper expensive.

Now that I am visiting Thailand, my interest in Photography has been rekindled with new and interesting subject matter observed in all walks of life.

Unfortunately I only have a 'Happy snap' camera and have limited options.

This how I saw the shot ...

But my Thai gf is developing an eye and with the camera her father recently bought her saw it like this ...

Yes, I know the above photos are more about focal length and focused subject rather then depth of field, but it may interest some of the viewers here and piqué their interest to think about what you discussed in your two posts.

cdnvic Thanks again ...

[David48]

I been thinking about what cdnvic said about the 'Rule of 3^rds'

Rules, of course, are meant to be broken, otherwise our photos simply become formulaic.

Here is one photo which has appeal to me.

I like it at a number of levels.

It engages me

Shows emotion and sympathy of the subject matter

The woman's left eye (as we look at the photo) takes my focus

and makes me ignore the background flaws

It's actually a square photo which is deceptive.

Lighting seems right, the background blurred a little as to not distract.

Despite the harsh sunlight, there must have been some reflection off the ground etc to provide the up lighting.

Same photo with the grid applied.

Same photo with the major background and subject flaws identified.

The green dot is just to indicate that this was actually a self-portrait.

[cdnvic]

Actually, that photo is very nicely balanced.

[David48]

More thinking about what cdnvic said about the 'Rule of 3^rds'

Do watch this as it may show you something old, in a new light and in an informative and entertaining fashion.

Application of the Rule of Thirds

I very much enjoyed watching it.

[fimgirl]

For instance, in a shot where you want a photo of a temple complex to sharp and focused throughput the photo, you would use a high "f-stop" such as 16, 22, or the highest your lens is capable of. This will make the buildings and people in focus regardless of if they are 10ft or 100ft away.

Using a lens at its minimum aperture is NOT a good idea - diffraction will affect the sharpness of most images using this technique and render them soft. See Here http://www.luminous-...ffraction.shtml for examples.

Dedicated macro lenses are exempt of course.

Allowing for perspective adjustments back to front DOF is better achieved using wider angle lenses.

Edited May 22, 2012 by fimgirl

[cdnvic]

Distortion always increases at higher and lower apertures, but that still doesn't mean that certain situations don't call for them. In this case we are trying to explain the basics of depth of field in a simple manner so that the reader grasps the concept. We can worry about the complications later.

[Kan Win]

From the original, I felt that the background distracted from the message and soul of the photo.

That is much better David48.

As for "rule of thirds", sorry, to me, it is old old hat.

(The rule of thirds was first written down^[5] by John Thomas Smith in 1797.)

Why? As most are either right-wing or left- wing to me, I like me photos in the middle, like yours David48.

http://en.wikipedia..../Rule_of_thirds

Win

[BangkokImages]

With the pic of the novice in robes above you can make him the focus of the photo and blur out the back ground by using a shorter depth of field. Depth of field is the measurment of how deep the focused area is in a photo. The higher the "f" number, the longer the depth of field.

For instance, in a shot where you want a photo of a temple complex to sharp and focused throughput the photo, you would use a high "f-stop" such as 16, 22, or the highest your lens is capable of. This will make the buildings and people in focus regardless of if they are 10ft or 100ft away.

If you wanted to make one person in that photo your subject you would want to use the lowest possible f-stop possible, preferably 1.8-3.5 so that only he is in focus, and the rest of the buildings blur into the background.

Keep in mind that distortion gets more pronounced at higher and lower f-stops, with f8 having barely any. Also, higher f-stops require much longer exposures as the aperture that allows light into the camera gets smaller and smaller, so high f-stops are not recommended for moving subjects.

http://www.artsphoto...h_of_field.html

I appreciate what you're trying to do here and that nitpicking might not be beneficial to the OP. But the way some of this is worded could be misleading to others so please don't take offence that I'm expanding on your explanation a bit. Depth of field really takes a lot of understanding, more than you can write in a post or a single article. As you've pointed out, it's extremely important for composition as well.

1. Depth of field is defined at the area of an image which is in focus as has been said, but the area consistently not understood is that DOF starts in the center of the focus point and extends inwards and outwards in both directions. Many are under the impression it only extends outwards. DOF is nothing more than the sum of a calculation of four variables. These variables are:

Sensor Size: The bigger the sensor the more shallow the DOF.

Aperture: The bigger the aperture (the smaller the number) the more shallow the DOF.

Focal Range: The bigger/longer the focal range (i.e. 200mm vs. 50mm) the more shallow the DOF. Or in other words, your DOF will be much more shallow at 200mm than at 50mm. Conversely the more wide your lens, say 16mm, will have much more DOF than 50mm provides.

Focal Distance: The closer you are to the subject, the more shallow the DOF.

These four variables determine your DOF. There are DOF calculators you can buy and carry in the field, free ones for your computer, etc.. but mostly experience will quickly show you what you'll get for a given set of settings if you pay attention to your settings before and after the shoot.

2. A "normal" lens, if there is such a thing, will be most sharp at F8. Some lenses will change this to F5.6 or F11, either will serve you well. Once you stop down to F11/16/32, you often are doing so unnecessarily where DOF is concerned (with the exception of anchor objects in wide angle photography, and macro work), but at the same time reducing the light so much you might be reaching a shutter speed which is insufficient for your focal length and bracing resulting in a blurred image.. or if you pump up your ISO to compensate then the further you deviate from your native ISO (100 for Canon and some Nikons, 200 for many Nikons, Fuji, etc) the more loss of detail and the more noise you'll be dealing with. F8 to F11 is only one stop, or half as much light at F11 is hitting your sensor than at F8.. but F16 is half of that, and F32 half of that.. so you can see it would be easy to really hurt yourself on the light and resulting image quality, perhaps for much more DOF than you really desire.

3. There are three types of 'distortion' we're normally concerned with where fstops are concerned:

a. Light fall off: This isn't really distortion, but light falls off around the corners, more at wider apertures (lower numbers).

b. Lens distortion: This is the most common distortion people fail to notice, and is expressed as "barrel distortion" or "pin cushion distortion", barrel distortion being a function of shorter focal lengths and how the camera is orientated to the subject at these wider angles, and pincushion distortion being a function of longer focal lengths. Normally the higher quality the lens the less lens distortion they exhibit, this is true for primes and zooms, with some focal lengths being next to impossible to totally eliminate distortion and still retain a practical size&weight factor.

c. Perspective distortion: This distortion is what most people notice, and shows up as tilted buildings, flat noses, etc.. and is a function of how we're holding the camera in relation to the subject.

Some articles I'm written on the subject might be useful to those trying to grasp DOF:

The Mighty 85mm - Here we take a look at the preferred portait focal length lens and included are some good visuals of DOF.

Depth of Field: A Useful Tool For Composition - The basics are explained.

What Depth of Field Can Do for Landscape Photography - This looks at a couple examples requiring a deeper depth of field.

Applying Depth of Field for Portraits - This is the area where most first start to notice DOF and want to control it, for portraits.

Playing With Depth of Field - This puts the above articles in perspective and how to use DOF in general.

There are probably 200+ other articles where DOF is demonstrated and explained, because DOF is that important. It's something you should understand backwards and forwards and something you should consider every time you choose a lens or look at a subject and form the composition in your mind. Take it slow, try to grasp just the basics at first, and then go out and play with the four variables (most people have only one camera with one size sensor, so really only 3 variables), play with your variables with your different lenses.. Notice what the quality of bokeh (the out of focus area) looks like for the different lenses you own. It's a huge subject which is easily made simple in small blocks of information.

Btw - I wrote these articles years ago and will be rewriting them this year with the goal of improving the explanations and selecting more useful example images. Any feedback to help me do this would be appreciated.

[samsiam]

I've lost my F button...where do you find it to adjust it ??

Seriously....always appears automatic

[David48]

I've lost my F button...where do you find it to adjust it ??

Seriously....always appears automatic

Hummm ... automatic F's .. can't control them?

Maybe you have a Tourettes style camera?

If not ... maybe the camera make and model might get more specific answers ...

Edited July 2, 2012 by David48

[David48]

I only have a 'happy snap' camera so I am more interested in comments on composure then 'F' stops (with this photo).

When the 'moment' only occurs for a second you have to think quick to capture that moment.

But in that special 'moment' you can still get some of the basics right.

The car is a distraction.

How else could you improve this?

[theblether]

You know I'm an idiot, could you photo-shop the car out??? Otherwise, I love that pic........but don't listen to me.

[samsiam]

I only have a 'happy snap' camera so I am more interested in comments on composure then 'F' stops (with this photo).

When the 'moment' only occurs for a second you have to think quick to capture that moment.

But in that special 'moment' you can still get some of the basics right.

The car is a distraction.

How else could you improve this?

A lower perspective might have been nicer....

[David48]

Really happy to see the Photography Forum buzzing now.

[MJP]

David,

You could try installing a KatzEye Optics focusing screen with the rule of thirds gridline pattern if your camera has 100% viewfinder coverage.

http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/page--Grid-Lines-Crop-Guides--gridlines.html

Also consider the Golden Mean.

http://photoinf.com/Golden_Mean/Eugene_Ilchenko/GoldenSection.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio#Aesthetics

This is good . . .

http://alafoto.com/?p=10064

Edited September 15, 2013 by MJP