Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Home | Photography Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures | Search | Login | Register | Help
Canon vs Nikon: Which is better?
One camera setting that ruins your pictures
(and more, keep reading):
 

Among our users, we have some of the most talented photographers in the world share advice that you won't find even in the most expensive subscription magazines. That's because some of them only post on our website, so you won't find this information anywhere else! Some of them post under an alias, others disclose their studio name, it's up to them. But in either case you get to read and discover photography techniques that will make you very good at taking pictures.

Unlike other websites, we don't try to pitch DSLRs, lenses, and other gear, while collecting sales commission. We don't sell photography tutorials, books, DVDs and courses, while promising that your photography will improve only if you buy what's being promoted.

Instead, we have other people, who are either professional photographers or serious amateurs, some with decades of experience, share with you what they learned, what gear they use, which products really work and which are useless, which techniques work and which don't.

It's all completely unbiased. Our users simply have no reason to lie to you. They are people just like you.

And we provide a free platform for you and them to communicate. So you get to discover this information straight from the source, from people just like you, not from editors of some magazine or sales reps of some company.

This is what makes us different from other photography websites out there that try to sell you something while claiming they are trying to help you.

If you are a beginner, intermediate, advanced, or a professional photographer, then the benefits of signing up for our free daily photography forum digest are:

• We cover both film and digital photography.

• We talk about professional (D)SLR cameras, mirrorless cameras, mid-range/prosumer models, point-and-shoot, and camera phones.

• We cover all types of photography from portraits to landscapes to action shots to macro photography. (Which one interests you the most? Stop and ask yourself right now. You'll need to be able to answer that in just a minute. No matter what you shoot, you'll get better at just that. Read below to find out why.)

• We cover all aspects of photography from picking gear to composition to working with models, and everything in between.

• Each week you'll be receiving new tips and techniques on how to take the kind of pictures that will make your friends, relatives and peers just stare in amazement, speechless, when they see your work. Yep! That's how good your photography will become.

• Daily, you'll be receiving a photography forum digest with the latest photography tips, tricks, reviews and discussions.

• If you ever have a question or need help, you can always ask, and we'll cover your question in the following newsletter issue.

• And of course, it's all completely FREE!

• Let me repeat that. Since for some reason a lot of people contact us asking if the membership is really free: we are a social website for photographers, so we don't sell anything, and we don't charge any fees. It's as simple as that.

Here is how to proceed and what to expect:

Enter your name and e-mail address below, and you'll be instantly added to our photography mailing list distribution. You'll receive a one-time confirmation e-mail. Right after that, the first e-mail with today's digest will be forwarded to you. The signup process is completely automated, so you are just a few minutes away from discovering what our existing users already received earlier today. You'll get up to speed right away on what's the latest on our website, without any long introductions or other delays.

First name:

E-mail address:

Going forward, the next digest will be released in just a few hours. So if you don't sign up now, you'll also miss everything covered in it too.

 
Photo Analysis
Just can't seem to get everything in focus :(
(?)
If you would like to post a reply, then please login (if you already have an account) or register (if you don't).
Page: 1 2 3 4 next>>
Jun 23, 2016 19:43:25   #
Annie B
 
It seems like hit or miss when I'm taking the pictures. Seems like they're in focus when I'm in the DMF mode(magnifying the picture and using the manual focus) and when I look at the picture after it's taken but I upload it to the computer and...nope...more often than not the whole picture is not in focus...I read that I shouldn't be using anything in the focus mode but the flexible spot but just for kicks I've been experimenting trying "wide or zone" it's still hit or miss...

What am I missing? Oh and in the case of one shot here I tried to aim in the middle so I could get it all in focus. Seemed to get the flower and SOME of the leaf but not all. I was using a 55mm lens in AP and SP with ISO on auto

The last one was better but it just looks like the stem and a little of the petals are blurry...


(Download)


(Download)
 
Jun 23, 2016 20:07:50   #
rgrenaderphoto (a regular here)
 
What aperture?
Jun 23, 2016 20:09:46   #
Annie B
 
F1.8 and F4... More DoF huh? Stop down the setting??
Jun 23, 2016 20:15:35   #
Longshadow (a regular here)
 
Smaller opening (f/16, 8 etc.)
But for these two, why would you want everything in focus?
The bokeh in them really helps accent the flowers, especially the second!
Jun 23, 2016 20:17:24   #
Annie B
 
out of focus....Just a bit of the leaf and a little bit of the daisy or am I being picky????
This third picture was not so lucky...
Longshadow wrote:
Smaller opening (f/16, 8 etc.)
But for these two, why would you want everything in focus?
The bokeh in them really helps accent the flowers, especially the second!


(Download)
Jun 23, 2016 20:28:26   #
Kuzano (a regular here)
 
Yes, you are being exceedingly picky for the images you posted.... They are great, the out of focus is a result of the large opening aperture you are shooting at. If you want more of the background to be in focus (not generally desired) you need to stop down your aperture to something like f8 to f16. (bigger number = smaller hole = longer deeper plane of focus)

Depth of field is a choice you make in determining the amount of focus front to back. Your images are focused where they need to be--on the subject. If you bring the leafy background into focus, you detract from the actual subject.. the flower.

Your desire to focus the whole image is "old school" thinking that the camera should focus the whole picture. That is neither creative or compositionally pleasing (except to you???)

Study exposure and depth of field, along with other aspects of controlling your images. Both of these look good, but you can have them be totally sharp with a smaller hole-bigger number aperture. Suggest that you can please yourself, but the whole image sharp front to back will disappoint with a less attractive subject.... or.... boring image.
 
Jun 23, 2016 20:29:49   #
Longshadow (a regular here)
 
mill_A wrote:
out of focus....Just a bit of the leaf and a little bit of the daisy or am I being picky????
This third picture was not so lucky...


I don't think your being too picky on the third, your depth of field is really shallow on that one.
The closer you focus on an object, the smaller your depth of field will be. I'll bet the f-stop for the third is pretty close to 1.8.
I'm still looking for a good comparison chart that I've seen, but check this out: http://digital-photography-school.com/seeing-in-depth-of-field-a-simple-understanding-of-aperture/

I couldn't find the pictorial I wanted, but here is a table. Compare the subject distance for the same f-stop and you'll see the difference in DOF, as well as the effect of different f-stops.
http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html
Jun 23, 2016 20:39:46   #
Annie B
 
Bingo 1.8 I think the problem I have is looking a the picture my eyes feel uncomfortable when they move to the blurry area, it's almost like looking thru someone else's glasses... Maybe that's just me..A previous pic I could crop that part out so it seemed more pleasing...Was I pushing the 55mm lens to it's limit too?
Longshadow wrote:
I don't think your being too picky on the third, your depth of field is really shallow on that one.
The closer you focus on an object, the smaller your depth of field will be. I'll bet the f-stop for the third is pretty close to 1.8.
I'm still looking for a good comparison chart that I've seen, but check this out: http://digital-photography-school.com/seeing-in-depth-of-field-a-simple-understanding-of-aperture/
Jun 23, 2016 20:52:50   #
Longshadow (a regular here)
 
mill_A wrote:
Bingo 1.8 I think the problem I have is looking a the picture my eyes feel uncomfortable when they move to the blurry area, it's almost like looking thru someone else's glasses... Maybe that's just me..A previous pic I could crop that part out so it seemed more pleasing...Was I pushing the 55mm lens to it's limit too?


Not really pushing the lens to the limit as much as the characteristics of the lens at that focal point and aperture. Most lenses will perform ABOUT the same, give or take.

The blur you are talking about is called bokeh, the part of the image that is out of focus. The bokeh will usually guide (force) the viewer to the main subject (because of the fact, as you said, that your eyes cannot focus on it). To have ALL of the image in focus in these images will greatly distract from the main subject.

I couldn't find the pictorial I wanted, but here is a table. Compare the subject distance for the same f-stop and you'll see the difference in DOF, as well as the effect of different f-stops for a given lens.
http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html

#2 is great by the way.
Jun 23, 2016 20:55:46   #
Annie B
 
Longshadow wrote:
Not really pushing the lens to the limit as much as the characteristics of the lens at that focal point and aperture. Most lenses will perform ABOUT the same, give or take.

The blur you are talking about is called bokeh, the part of the image that is out of focus. The bokeh will usually guide (force) the viewer to the main subject (because of the fact, as you said, that your eyes cannot focus on it). To have ALL of the image in focus in these images will greatly distract from the main subject.

I couldn't find the pictorial I wanted, but here is a table. Compare the subject distance for the same f-stop and you'll see the difference in DOF, as well as the effect of different f-stops for a given lens.
http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html

#2 is great by the way.
Not really pushing the lens to the limit as much a... (show quote)


Jun 23, 2016 21:27:43   #
Apaflo (a regular here)
 
Longshadow wrote:
T6he blur you are talking about is called bokeh, the part of the image that is out of focus. The bokeh will usually guide (force) the viewer to the main subject (because of the fact, as you said, that your eyes cannot focus on it). To have ALL of the image in focus in these images will greatly distract from the main subject.

The blur is not called bokeh! Bokeh is the quality of the blur, not the quantity.
 
Jun 23, 2016 21:44:09   #
Longshadow (a regular here)
 
Apaflo wrote:
The blur is not called bokeh! Bokeh is the quality of the blur, not the quantity.


Still bokeh (the out of focus area). There's good bokeh and bad bokeh, and it's subjective.
Jun 23, 2016 21:55:29   #
Apaflo (a regular here)
 
Longshadow wrote:
Still bokeh (the out of focus area). There's good bokeh and bad bokeh, and it's subjective.

Bokeh is not the "out of focus area".

It isn't really good or bad either. It might be harsh or smooth, and either of those can be "good" in different circumstances. It's like light being warm or cold...
Jun 23, 2016 22:10:36   #
robertjerl (a regular here)
 
mill_A wrote:
It seems like hit or miss when I'm taking the pictures. Seems like they're in focus when I'm in the DMF mode(magnifying the picture and using the manual focus) and when I look at the picture after it's taken but I upload it to the computer and...nope...more often than not the whole picture is not in focus...I read that I shouldn't be using anything in the focus mode but the flexible spot but just for kicks I've been experimenting trying "wide or zone" it's still hit or miss...

What am I missing? Oh and in the case of one shot here I tried to aim in the middle so I could get it all in focus. Seemed to get the flower and SOME of the leaf but not all. I was using a 55mm lens in AP and SP with ISO on auto

The last one was better but it just looks like the stem and a little of the petals are blurry...
It seems like hit or miss when I'm taking the pict... (show quote)


Those shots look pretty good. The main subject is in focus, it is a shallow depth of field at your settings. That blurred background is called "bokeh" by most, some will dispute it. Most photographers try to get that blur in front of and behind the main subject to make the subject stand out.

Here is what you get with more depth of field: 180 mm macro lens at f/20 (twenty) from about 6 feet away to get a little more DOF.


(Download)
Jun 23, 2016 22:10:49   #
Longshadow (a regular here)
 
Apaflo wrote:
Bokeh is not the "out of focus area".
It isn't really good or bad either. It might be harsh or smooth, and either of those can be "good" in different circumstances. It's like light being warm or cold...


Then we better get the dictionary and the rest of the world corrected:
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/bokeh?s=t

Harsh might be bad (not pleasing), smooth may be good (pleasing), as well as color complementary, too busy, etc., but it depends on the viewer, as good (pleasing) and bad (not pleasing) are subjective to the individual viewer.
Page: 1 2 3 4 next>>
Photo Analysis
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2016 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.