The Circle of Confusion in the Print
Jun 16, 2023 11:17:58 #
The nature of CoC has been known since 1829, applied to images viewed through telescopes. By 1866, CoC was used to determine the nearest and the farthest objects that are in acceptably sharp focus, within the depth of field (DoF) in the print.
CoC did not originate with the sensor, lens, aperture and focus distance. Those are only predictors of how it will be seen in the print.
For more information, see the link in the next post.
CoC did not originate with the sensor, lens, aperture and focus distance. Those are only predictors of how it will be seen in the print.
For more information, see the link in the next post.
Jun 16, 2023 11:18:45 #
Jun 17, 2023 07:35:12 #
selmslie wrote:
Those are only predictors of how it will be seen in the print.
For more information ...
For more information ...
Here is another example.
I have a 16MP Fuji X100T with a fixed 23mm lens in a 1.5 crop sensor and a 16mm Nikon Df with a full frame sensor on which I can mount a 35mm lens. When I compared them I could see no difference in the DoF resulting images.
But the numbers are too small to show this in a DoF calculator. I can't be sure whether the reported focal lengths are actually the true focal lengths or how f/11 is rounded in the calculator.
So I ran the comparison for a hypothetical zoom lens. The results are almost identical. (I can get an exact match if I use 236mm and 340mm respectively.)
Jun 17, 2023 10:40:52 #
selmslie wrote:
O can get an exact match if I use 236mm and 340mm respectively.
Here is another example using the PhotoPills calculator.
Jun 17, 2023 12:48:06 #
Is there a question here?
All DOF 'calculators' are approximations.
There are lots of variables that vary from lens to lens, even with similar specifications.
There are variables on the print side as well, including printer quality, paper surface, & viewing distance.
If this is a genuine question about how circles of confusion affect print quality in a system, my advice would be to worry less about the theoretical and optimize your workflow.
Remove variable, Take pictures, make prints. You can start with controlled light and resolution charts, then regular scenes . See what actually looks good to you.
All DOF 'calculators' are approximations.
There are lots of variables that vary from lens to lens, even with similar specifications.
There are variables on the print side as well, including printer quality, paper surface, & viewing distance.
If this is a genuine question about how circles of confusion affect print quality in a system, my advice would be to worry less about the theoretical and optimize your workflow.
Remove variable, Take pictures, make prints. You can start with controlled light and resolution charts, then regular scenes . See what actually looks good to you.
Jun 17, 2023 12:54:08 #
MJPerini wrote:
Is there a question here? br All DOF 'calculators'... (show quote)
Scotty seldom asks questions, but he does provide a lot of information. Much of it is over my head but for some he holds a treasure trove.
---
Jun 17, 2023 13:17:43 #
Jun 17, 2023 13:47:38 #
Jun 17, 2023 14:09:51 #
selmslie wrote:
The nature of CoC has been known since 1829, applied to images viewed through telescopes. By 1866, CoC was used to determine the nearest and the farthest objects that are in acceptably sharp focus, within the depth of field (DoF) in the print.
CoC did not originate with the sensor, lens, aperture and focus distance. Those are only predictors of how it will be seen in the print.
For more information, see the link in the next post.
CoC did not originate with the sensor, lens, aperture and focus distance. Those are only predictors of how it will be seen in the print.
For more information, see the link in the next post.
That term can be applied to so many things!
Jun 17, 2023 14:51:00 #
timeve wrote:
Never heard of the Circle of Confusion, must be something new.
"In photography, the circle of confusion is used to determine the depth of field, the part of an image that is acceptably sharp."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_of_confusion
---
Jun 17, 2023 15:04:13 #
MJPerini wrote:
If this is a genuine question about how circles of confusion affect print quality in a system, my advice would be to worry less about the theoretical and optimize your workflow.
The circle of confusion has absolutely nothing to do with print quality.
Jun 17, 2023 15:09:12 #
Bill_de wrote:
"In photography, the circle of confusion is used to determine the depth of field, the part of an image that is acceptably sharp."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_of_confusion
---
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_of_confusion
---
A circle of confusion is just bunch of photographers setting around arguing about depth of field.
That's something that happens here on UHH with amazing regularity.
It usually attracts lots of comments from people who are unable or unwilling to understand the topic.
Jun 17, 2023 15:11:10 #
selmslie wrote:
The circle of confusion has absolutely nothing to do with print quality.
Thaz OK. Real photographers dont print anymore ... thaz for hobbyist fossils and "arts fair" peddlers wearing berets.
Jun 17, 2023 15:12:43 #
User ID wrote:
Thaz OK. Real photographers dont print anymore ... thaz for hobbyist fossils and "arts fair" peddlers wearing berets.
Ignorance is bliss.
Jun 17, 2023 15:15:34 #
selmslie wrote:
Ignorance is bliss.
The usual fossils reply to inconvenient facts. Wake up and smell the capucino. Have read your own thread title ?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.