A&P Spring pic - C&C welcomed

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Smeghead, Apr 24, 2009.

  1. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
  2. jokka

    jokka OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    Messages:
    38,422
    Likes Received:
    33
    Location:
    GO REDSKINS
    Wirelessly posted via wap.offtopic.com (lulz: BlackBerry8320/4.2.2 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/100)

    Nice color, crayola
     
  3. TheManLouisianaFace

    TheManLouisianaFace and decide!

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    32,995
    Likes Received:
    0
    A smaller dof to blow out the background would be nice.
     
  4. MawcDrums

    MawcDrums Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Messages:
    62,962
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Zebes
    :werd: background is a bit distracting..
     
  5. MawcDrums

    MawcDrums Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Messages:
    62,962
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Zebes
    IMHO I would have liked the background to be the rest of the tree / that nice deep blue sky..
     
  6. Drunken Karnie Midget

    Drunken Karnie Midget In Yeo We Trust, All Others Pay Cash OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    39,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Dirty Canada
    It's at f2.8....

    This is what i was gonna say. and you have oversaturated in post. tone down the colors by a notch or two, and you're golden.
     
  7. TheManLouisianaFace

    TheManLouisianaFace and decide!

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    32,995
    Likes Received:
    0


    What's your point? Lenses go down below 2.8...or use a longer focal length @ 2.8 for more bokeh.
     
  8. Drunken Karnie Midget

    Drunken Karnie Midget In Yeo We Trust, All Others Pay Cash OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    39,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Dirty Canada
    yeah, he shot at 17mm... should have gone to 50 and stood back to frame it the same... or just recompose outright.
     
  9. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
    My lens only goes down to 2.8 :hs:
     
  10. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
    Okay I toned down on the vibrance. Put it back to 0 actually :o

    Better?

    [​IMG]
     
  11. FusionZ06

    FusionZ06 /\__/\__/\__0>

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    86,918
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sunshine State
  12. ok_computer

    ok_computer OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    15,615
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB, Canada
    :ugh:
     
  13. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
    Fail
     
  14. asdfbunk

    asdfbunk A Member OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    29,813
    Likes Received:
    8
    ? i thought distance to subject was what determined DOF, not focal length

    According to our very own Jcolman. :dunno:
     
  15. Kappa00

    Kappa00 Pizza

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    0

    I don't think he would be using the same f-stop.
     
  16. TheManLouisianaFace

    TheManLouisianaFace and decide!

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    32,995
    Likes Received:
    0



    [​IMG]


    I was a good 25-30 feet away from this guy. 300mm (200mm lens on a crop body) @ f/2.8.

    My 50mm @ 2.8 doesn't separate the background nearly as much.
     
  17. asdfbunk

    asdfbunk A Member OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    29,813
    Likes Received:
    8
    The statement you bolded says what I said.

    edit

    I said it wrong, a combination of distance and focal length. Meaning framing it the same, with the same aperture means it'll have the same DOF. woops :o
     
  18. TheManLouisianaFace

    TheManLouisianaFace and decide!

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    32,995
    Likes Received:
    0
    yup
     
  19. asdfbunk

    asdfbunk A Member OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    29,813
    Likes Received:
    8
    I'm confused, you told him to frame it the same with a longer focal length. Wouldn't that do nothing to his DoF?

    Once again, I'm mistaken, the other guy said that. :o

    sorry, just took my last final
     
  20. TheManLouisianaFace

    TheManLouisianaFace and decide!

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    32,995
    Likes Received:
    0
    :rofl: take a nap or something bro
     
  21. asdfbunk

    asdfbunk A Member OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    29,813
    Likes Received:
    8
    never!!

    got hockey with the boys soon :mamoru:
     
  22. Drunken Karnie Midget

    Drunken Karnie Midget In Yeo We Trust, All Others Pay Cash OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    39,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Dirty Canada
    It was me that said that... and yeah, you're right: getting the same framing with a longer focal length will result in the same DoF. going from the same distance and going for a longer focal length will result in shallower DoF.
     

Share This Page