Boring Photo for Technical Critique

[Shebang]

Advice, please.

Canon 40D with 17-40mm f/4 L lens
focal length = 37
shutter speed = 1/800
aperture value = 4
iso = 400
spot metered
Picture style = landscape
white balance = cloudy
in-camera sharpness set at 7 (sharpest)

No PP except resize.

[A.M.D.A.]

Ice? You didn't do too badly, definitely not a boring photo to me. You also did better than last time I shot ice crystals.

I think a slight contrast boost and some unsharp mask will help add "pop". Also, something bothers me about the composition, the branch is a bit low. Try cropping severely to zero in on the tip of the branch, eliminating the other half.

[Shebang]

Oops. Sorry.

[A.M.D.A.]

I like it much more in horizontal format.

[Greg McCary]

I think you need some way to separate it more from the BG. It kind of gets lost in it. I like the original crop better than the second. Your DOF may be to shallow. What is the EXIF?

[Shebang]

Ice? You didn't do too badly, definitely not a boring photo to me. You also did better than last time I shot ice crystals.

I think a slight contrast boost and some unsharp mask will help add "pop". Also, something bothers me about the composition, the branch is a bit low. Try cropping severely to zero in on the tip of the branch, eliminating the other half.

Yes, our ever-changing Oklahoma weather brought us an ice storm -- nothing like last year, thankfully.

I shot it vertically and didn't even consider that it worked horizontally. It is almost overwhelming trying to learn this camera...and all that goes with it. I don't know about "unsharp mask." Can you help?

[Greg McCary]

The unsharp mask really depends on what PPing software you use, if none is used most cameras have a setting to do it, check the manual. Post in the software forum and GB can help you on the software end. There was a great discussion going on there about this very subject. DRG has posted some great info on it.
Unsharp Mask

[Shebang]

I think you need some way to separate it more from the BG. It kind of gets lost in it. I like the original crop better than the second. Your DOF may be to shallow. What is the EXIF?

I agree with you about getting lost in the background. Why do you say the DOF may be too shallow? -- I don't understand. And apparently I don't understand EXIF either -- aarrrggggg! I thought the info in my first post was the EXIF. What am I missing?


Thanks to you all for the help.

[Greg McCary]

EXIF is the camera settings when shot. F stop, shutter speed ect. Being to shallow or wide open means you shot close to the wide open end of the lens aperature like f/2.8 or 3.5. You should try f/6 or f/8

[jetrim]

And apparently I don't understand EXIF either -- aarrrggggg! I thought the info in my first post was the EXIF. What am I missing?

You do, it's there, they missed it

You were shooting wide open at f/4 but unless you were right on top of the subject, that should be fine. Looks to me like there was a bit of a breeze blowing and there may have been a slight vibration of the plant's stem or a touch of camera shake, but at 1/800 shutter speed that shouldn't matter much either. It looks plenty sharp, but not entirely focused.

[Shebang]

Here's another attempt with a tighter crop and the unsharp mask changes as recommended in the article.

What do you think?

Edit: Oops. Forgot the horizontal.

[Shebang]

EXIF is the camera settings when shot. F stop, shutter speed ect. Being to shallow or wide open means you shot close to the wide open end of the lens aperature like f/2.8 or 3.5. You should try f/6 or f/8

I did shoot it at f/4 (wide open for my lens), and I do finally have a decent understanding of DOF in a general sense, but for this particular photo, why do you suggest f/6 or f/8? Because stems are not quite in focus?

Thanks for your help.

[Shebang]

You do, it's there, they missed it

You were shooting wide open at f/4 but unless you were right on top of the subject, that should be fine. Looks to me like there was a bit of a breeze blowing and there may have been a slight vibration of the plant's stem or a touch of camera shake, but at 1/800 shutter speed that shouldn't matter much either. It looks plenty sharp, but not entirely focused.

Trying to understand here...

With my 17-40 lens I was within an arm's length of the subject. So, for this particular photo, is the f/4 too wide open and thus the DOF caught the pods in focus but missed the stems because they are at a different plane? And that's why you say it's sharp but not focused?

Greg: Is that what you are saying?


Thanks.

[jetrim]

The closer you get to the subject, the smaller your DoF will be overall. According to the online depth of field calulator and your posted EXIF you had a total DoF of just under 4" (front to back) if you were approx 3' away from the stem. If you had been 10' away your total DoF grows to 3 1/2'. You may simply have been too close because at that distance, tightening the aperture would have a negligible effect (maybe 1" more DoF at f/6.7)

[Shebang]

Thank you. This helps a lot!

So, now my question is: How do you make this practical in the field?

Does getting the right DOF for the effect you seek just come with time and practice?

Surely you photographers who consistently post these beautiful photos don't stop and calculate all this every time you snap the shutter? And, if you do, how do you?

Would you say mastering DOF is probably the most important aspect of photography?

[Greg McCary]

I did shoot it at f/4 (wide open for my lens), and I do finally have a decent understanding of DOF in a general sense, but for this particular photo, why do you suggest f/6 or f/8? Because stems are not quite in focus?

Thanks for your help.

My thinking was the Bokeh wouldn't be so distracting.

[Shebang]

My thinking was the Bokeh wouldn't be so distracting.

Obtaining a blurred background was a conscious effort on my part which is why I chose f/4 thinking it would give me the most shallow DOF and thus creating a pleasing bokeh. I understand DOF more than I ever have -- but obviously not enough. Back to the books and now an on-line calculator.

Thanks.

[A.M.D.A.]

Thank you. This helps a lot!

So, now my question is: How do you make this practical in the field?

Does getting the right DOF for the effect you seek just come with time and practice?

Surely you photographers who consistently post these beautiful photos don't stop and calculate all this every time you snap the shutter? And, if you do, how do you?

Would you say mastering DOF is probably the most important aspect of photography?

First of all, I wouldn't say that I post "beautiful photos"... I'll happily let my fellow PR members decide about that...

How do you make photos practical in the field? Well, *just* think about spending at least 20min at one photo location, working with a subject. And if you are going to be taking family/friends with you, warn them beforehand otherwise you will end up with some very bored and/or cranky people (who needs that to interfere with picture-taking?). This has happened to me dozens of times, I get caught up exploring shooting angles, lighting angles, DOF, focus, etc., and when I finally look up, my friends/family are nowhere in sight. :nonod: Another time, a family member later told me that she had finished half a novel-book while I shot 2 or 3 macros! To me it seemed like only minutes had gone by... but I guess that wasn't the case from a non-photographer's point-of-view.

So that's right, part of the trick is to stay as long as possible with a single subject, crouch up, crouch down, flip the F-numbers around, get nearer, get farther, etc.. I have found that using a tripod often helps, because it forces one to slow down and concentrate on what he/she is shooting. Handheld, one (including me :blush2 can be inclined to "snap away", thinking "this is a pretty scene, it must make a pretty photograph". Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. You have to learn and read as much as possible (e.g. PR ) – but most importantly – shoot!!! :thumbsup:

"Beautiful photos" usually aren't the result of only one shutter-snap. I have filled up memory cards and drained too many battery packs trying to get a single acceptable shot of a particular subject. I would suggest that you do the same, but not like set the camera on a tripod, AF, engage burst mode, and fire off 20 identical images! Try to shoot each differently (lighting, angle, aperture, etc.).

DOF is very, very important – but it is not the only thing that's important. Without a piece of film or an image sensor, a set of aperture blades would be 100% useless. Each photographic component is useless without the other accompanying.

And yes, stop and calculate everything before taking a photo. It will become a habit if this is done often enough... and with plenty of dedication.

Hope this helps some.

P.S. jetrim, thanks for sharing that DOF calculator link!

[Shebang]

Yes, it does. Thanks! (twitching in fetal position clutching exploding head :cryin: :eek6: :yikes: :crazy: ...again...muttering "I can do this. I can do this. I can do this...")

[jetrim]

Thank you. This helps a lot!

So, now my question is: How do you make this practical in the field?

Does getting the right DOF for the effect you seek just come with time and practice?

Surely you photographers who consistently post these beautiful photos don't stop and calculate all this every time you snap the shutter? And, if you do, how do you?

Would you say mastering DOF is probably the most important aspect of photography?

OK now that you've got a link to understand what effects DoF and how much, I'm going to confess that I rarely use that calculator (although I do have it saved to favorites on my smart phone - just in case). There is a better way that's pretty accurate and very useable in the field without having to lug a 250' tape measure around all the time. Nikons and Fujis have a button to check the DoF (see attached photo) and I'm pretty sure Canons do too but I'm not sure where yours is located. What this button does, is to manually set the aperture blades to the f/ stop you've selected while pressed. The picture through the viewfinder will be dark, but the DoF will be reasonably accurate.

DoF is probably NOT the most important aspect of photography, but like sex and marriage, Good DoF won't save a bad photo, but bad DoF can certainly ruin a good one I agree w/ ADMA that it's just another part of the equation, but it does offer more leeway than some of the other parts, like exposure.

[jetrim]

FWIW, I did play with your image a little last night, and tried a few things like duplicating the image into 2 layers, setting the lower layer to 'emboss' and the upper layer to 'overlay' in an effort to get the foreground to pop just a little more.

I'm not sure my results are any better than your cropped version, but here it is.

[Shebang]

Thanks, jetrim. Your time and help are much appreciated. My Canon 40D does have the DoF button which now has my attention.

[A.M.D.A.]

Thanks, jetrim. Your time and help are much appreciated. My Canon 40D does have the DoF button which now has my attention.

Just keep in mind that using the DOF feature will dimmen up your viewfinder/LCD live view considerably, depending on what aperture you have selected. Anything smaller than F8.0 will be very tough to see on cloudy days.

I prefer to simply take a shot, review it on the screen and if it doesn't come out well, shoot another one.

[Shebang]

I discovered it has one. I haven't a clue how it works yet, although I did try it and saw the dimming you refer to. I'm a "show me" rather than a "tell me" sort. Wish I could hire one of you experts for a while...(sigh)

I have been to three beginner/intermediate classes which helped tremendously, but when you start knowing absolutely nothing about all this, it's a lot to absorb.

[Greg McCary]

I discovered it has one. I haven't a clue how it works yet, although I did try it and saw the dimming you refer to. I'm a "show me" rather than a "tell me" sort. Wish I could hire one of you experts for a while...(sigh)

I have been to three beginner/intermediate classes which helped tremendously, but when you start knowing absolutely nothing about all this, it's a lot to absorb.

You are probably learning faster than you realize. Posting here will shorten the learning time tremendously. The best advise I ever got was practice practice, practice. Keep them coming and keep asking questions.