F stop for auto shows (Page 2): The OP wants the background out of focus.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

selmslie wrote:

I only use prime lenses and 35mm has been my usual choice. With 40mm I have to be a little more careful with framing.

I once made the mistake of using 24mm and got a result I didn't like.

The OP wants the background out of focus.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

JohnSwanda wrote:

The OP wants the background out of focus.

As they say in Maine, you can’t get there from here.

If you throw the background out of focus some of the car will also blur. I already explained why a long focal length won’t work.

That leaves you with blurring the background in post. I don’t think that’s very practical either, a lot of work.

rcarol

selmslie wrote:

As they say in Maine, you can’t get there from here.

If you throw the background out of focus some of the car will also blur. I already explained why a long focal length won’t work.

That leaves you with blurring the background in post. I don’t think that’s very practical either, a lot of work.

Blurring the background in post is not a lot of work if you use "Depth Blur" in Neurol Filters.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

selmslie wrote:

I only use prime lenses and 35mm has been my usual choice. With 40mm I have to be a little more careful with framing.

I once made the mistake of using 24mm and got a result I didn't like.

I'm sure I have wider shots from the 16-35, but I'm not at a computer with my LRCAT loaded. What I see on Flickr tends to fall between 28mm and 35mm for the 16-35 zoom. Otherwise, I've at Old Car City (Georgia) usually with a 35mm prime on one body and a 50mm on the 2nd body. I've had some success at 24mm but that was only once on film and the MF results aren't as sharp as I get nowadays with MILCs and / or AF capable film bodies.

For our OP: consider a knee pad for 'low and wide'. Alternatively, consider your camera's vari-angle LCD so you can hold your camera up over your head, compose and focus, and get the wide-angle portrait 'overhead' shot of the car.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

On a related topic, one minor frustration at large car shows like Barrett-Jackson is that there is frequently an identification paper taped inside the front windshield. That's tough to edit out. I may go back to some of my old shots and try removing the paper with Photoshop's AI feature.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

User ID wrote:

AMEN !

Other less sophisticated editors can also do the job but work would proceed a bit slower.

Actually the blur in LR now is very good and easy. Also if you’re on a tripod or have good IBIS you could focus stack.

User ID

Much rather use the background than lose it.

(Download)

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

gvarner wrote:

The challenge at auto shows or in outdoor auto photos is to have the subject sharp and the background blurry. I know that a wide open aperture would do the trick but runs the hazard of not having the entire length of the auto in focus if it’s at an angle to the camera. Is there one f-stop recommended or would it be better to do a few bursts at various stops to get a blurry background? Or would a short tele help to add to bokeh?

There are charts of "depth of field" for many lenses at different f/stops, and distances=the greater the distance the greater the depth of field. I have used telephoto lens from distance just to get subjects into the depth of field.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

DWU2 wrote:

On a related topic, one minor frustration at large car shows like Barrett-Jackson is that there is frequently an identification paper taped inside the front windshield. That's tough to edit out. I may go back to some of my old shots and try removing the paper with Photoshop's AI feature.

Update: I tried Photoshop AI to remove the papers, and it usually worked pretty well.

cahale Loc: San Angelo, TX

gvarner wrote:

The challenge at auto shows or in outdoor auto photos is to have the subject sharp and the background blurry. I know that a wide open aperture would do the trick but runs the hazard of not having the entire length of the auto in focus if it’s at an angle to the camera. Is there one f-stop recommended or would it be better to do a few bursts at various stops to get a blurry background? Or would a short tele help to add to bokeh?

Remember that depth of field is relative, not absolute. If the way the vehicles are parked allows, get further away from the subject and use f4 or whatever the limit of your lens is.

John O.

Use the following depth of field chart. If you do not see your specific camera model listed, choose a camera that has the same sensor size as your camera (full frame, APS-C, Micro 4/3rds, etc. No one can tell you what focal length and aperture to use since they do not know the distance you will be from each car or part of a car. DOF Master even has a chart function so that you can print off charts and take them with you. https://www.dofmaster.com

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

(SOOC shooters need read no further)

I always try to get a reasonably large DOF in my shots. DOF can be reduced in post, but it's hard to make it larger.

A car show does lend itself to setup shots, so it is possible to produce the DOF you want at exposure time. Completely up to you. I did events that were dynamic so setup shots were rare and I tried for a large DOF normally. I could adjust it downward if the scene called for it. Adjusting it upward involved things like Topaz AI Sharpen or multiple exposures and image combination.

rcarol

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Actually the blur in LR now is very good and easy. Also if you’re on a tripod or have good IBIS you could focus stack.

I don't understand how focus stacking is going to help blur the background.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

rcarol wrote:

I don't understand how focus stacking is going to help blur the background.

I think it is being suggested as a way to sharpen the background.

rcarol

DirtFarmer wrote:

I think it is being suggested as a way to sharpen the background.

I understand that but the OP wanted to blur the background, not sharpen it.