Spring will be here soon, but not today: Please critique compositions. Shot for "depth of field" theme in my flickr group. f/11 seems to give best clarity with my 14-140 mm Lumix lens...

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Please critique compositions. Shot for "depth of field" theme in my flickr group. f/11 seems to give best clarity with my 14-140 mm Lumix lens on Olympus EM-1 Mark ii. I do understand the trade-offs of not using a tripod

Also, I didn't sharpen any additional amount from the preset in PS Elements ACR for raw.

Thanks much!
.

(Download)

NMGal Loc: NE NM

They both look good to me.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

NMGal wrote:

They both look good to me.

Thanks for your time, Barbara.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Not sure what the intention is. Is it to maximise DOF or to show the limitations? The background mountain is soft, which would make it inappropriate if the intention was to maximise DOF. OTOH if you want to demonstrate a carefully selected DOF, a soft background would do that.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

R.G. wrote:

Not sure what the intention is. Is it to maximise DOF or to show the limitations? The background mountain is soft, which would make it inappropriate if the intention was to maximise DOF. OTOH if you want to demonstrate a carefully selected DOF, a soft background would do that.

Intent = maximize depth of field. The air seemed clear, but distance is a couple of miles or more.

Are you thinking mountain can be sharper at that distance, so we're talking camera/sensor/lens limitations, or I'm still not holding steady enough (at 1/800 sec)?

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

Well, no download so hard to tell. But they look sharp front to back, to me!

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Retired CPO wrote:

Well, no download so hard to tell. But they look sharp front to back, to me!

Thanks for your time! They are embedded on UHH page from flickr and display here the full size that I shared, and same there if you click to expand.

But...good point about needing to see larger, given my request. Oops

Here's one at 5000 px for those with sharp eyes and large monitors:

(Download)

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Linda From Maine wrote:

... Are you thinking mountain can be sharper at that distance...

The mountain might be pin-sharp focuswise but it's impossible to say. I'm thinking that if you want to show front-to-back sharpness, a soft background mountain isn't a good choice of background.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

R.G. wrote:

The mountain might be pin-sharp focuswise but it's impossible to say. I'm thinking that if you want to show front-to-back sharpness, a soft background mountain isn't a good choice of background.

You've caused me to think that perhaps I shouldn't be shooting such long distances for this theme

I got one yesterday that's much closer, but a bit boring: https://flic.kr/p/2pCwBVk

Thanks for your time, R.G.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Your posted example shows that you probably want to avoid too much distance since that's what caused the problem. Your linked photo would be good if it included a longer view, but it wouldn't have to be any longer than the field of vines (?). Anything with lots of distinct detail but not too much distance would probably be ideal.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

R.G. wrote:

Your posted example shows that you probably want to avoid too much distance since that's what caused the problem. Your linked photo would be good if it included a longer view, but it wouldn't have to be any longer than the field of vines (?). Anything with lots of distinct detail but not too much distance would probably be ideal.

Lots of good advice, thanks for your time.

I did a bit in Topaz Studio 2 on this one (AI Clear, basic adust, and of course color saturation

):

(Download)

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Linda From Maine wrote:

Lots of good advice, thanks for your time...

You're welcome. Another suggestion:- You could play on the "depth" aspect of DOF. It wouldn't have to involve huge distances but if it conveyed a good sense of depth it might tell the desired story better.

mvetrano2 Loc: Commack, NY

nice

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

I believe your third offering--the one with the pebbles if the foreground--does the best job of demonstrating DOF.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

jaymatt wrote:

I believe your third offering--the one with the pebbles if the foreground--does the best job of demonstrating DOF.

Thanks very much, John. I decided the same, after editing it two more times, though I ended up leaving out a lot of the rocks.