|
|
|
Linn Currie
{K:24426} 5/19/2004
|
Paolo, thank you for the great advice. I will be trying it soon.
Regards
Linn
|
|
|
|
|
Paolo Barthelemy
{K:25552} 5/19/2004
|
Hi, Linn!
You may work in two ways:
1) maximize the zoom and the aperture (whenever possible) and decrease the shutter speed accondingly. Put the camera as near as possible to the part of the subject (the front petals) you want on focus. These things will make the shallowest DOF.
2) Use PS, create a gradient mask and use gaussian blur.
Apart from these advices, I think this shot is very beautiful as it is, with its great lighting and its very pleasant colors and dof. Excellent composition too.
My kindest regards, Paolo
|
|
|
|
Subhash Sen
{K:11931} 5/19/2004
|
Linn i always liked such photographs & have worked on this concept of blurr & out of focus in my florals u can check out & may be u like them,cheers,Subhash.
|
|
|
|
|
Subhash Sen
{K:11931} 5/19/2004
|
Linn i always liked such photographs & have worked on this cocept of blurr & out of focus in my florals u can check out & may be u like them,cheers,Subhash.
|
|
|
|
|
Linn Currie
{K:24426} 5/18/2004
|
Good Morning Bill
No, this is a Crysanthinum hybrid.
Yes, I understand what you are saying. Have a look at my portfolio and you will see how I like "playing" with the focus. This particular flower I wanted something way different to what I have done before. Sharp front petals, then fading the focus through to the back. Didn't succeed with this one though as I needed much more out-of-focus petals at the back. But I will simply try and try again till I get it right :-)
I promise to post a sharp, full in focus floral for you some time or the other :-)))
Have a wonderful day!
Linn
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Webster
{K:1669} 5/18/2004
|
Linn, I personally would have gotten the middle area sharp as well, then have the back petals blur out a little. As it is, my eye wants to see that center area in better detail. Thats just me. I like pretty much all my photos sharp top to bottom, so take my comment lightly. (Is this a Dahlia?) Best....
Bill W.
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Lightner
{K:12684} 5/18/2004
|
Using the Minolta at its longest focal length would give you less DOF even at an aperture of 3.5.Might want to try it.Very similar to the Dimage 7 HI
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Lightner
{K:12684} 5/18/2004
|
Nothing shy about this little young lady .shes outspoken!
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Spracklen
{K:32552} 5/17/2004
|
Not quite sure what you were aiming for, Linn ~ even having read your introduction!! But I'd prefer to see the whole flower in sharp focus.
Kind regards, Chris
|
|
|
|
|
Felipe Woichejosky
{K:4766} 5/17/2004
|
Hi Linn, when of a single flower it is I prefer that the definition is perfect everywhere, it is a question of personal pleasure. These pictures, when it used my old Nikon F2AS, those made with f/32 openings and until f/64. Today I don't achieve the quality of those old pictures, but in cases like this work and when I want to obtain the greatest fidelity, I work with the camera in the manual way (focus and meassure), the smallest available diaphragm and obturation speeds that fluctuate (depending on the existent light conditions) among 1 and until 8 seconds in some cases.
Multiple DOF in a single flower is equal for my to a visual contamination.
If you want to obtain more out of focus in the back petals proceed as Antonio Trincone indicates.
My best, Felipe.
|
|
|
|
Lori Stitt
{K:75282} 5/17/2004
|
Hi Linn,
The larger the apeture, the more shallow the focus will be. Probably if this high contrast flower was photographed against mid to light tones, I'm thinking it would 'look' not quite as sharp (not that it's sharp, just would appear more out of focus). If all else fails, use the 'lens blur' in PS!
Lori :)
|
|
|
|
|
Antonio Trincone
{K:23167} 5/17/2004
|
matter of lens too; if you use a strong tele you can achieve what you need, or f1.4 instead of 2.8
|
|
|
|
|
Rawabi Al-Nuaimi
{K:15659} 5/17/2004
|
gorgeous..! great dof :) and i love the colors and patterns of the petals :)
|
|
0 
