Help with Blah image (Page 5): I'm thinking about running a set of exposures focused at different lengths from the nearest bit of branch to the furthest with the aperture wide open.

Psergel Loc: New Mexico

amehta wrote:

Wouldn't you want focus unstacking?

I'm thinking about running a set of exposures focused at different lengths from the nearest bit of branch to the furthest with the aperture wide open. Then stacking for contrast. I might be able to keep the background out of focus completely while still getting all of the tree sharp.
I've played with focus stacking before but only with small close up subjects like flowers. (Approaching "macro")

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

Psergel wrote:

Original included.

If I remember correctly the tree was about 20-30 feet from the base of the little hill behind it. The lens was set to 85mm and f8.
This was in NM where the sun is kind of unkind.

There was no data in your "store original" download? David

Psergel Loc: New Mexico

Meives wrote:

There was no data in your "store original" download? David

So I've been told and I don't know why. I export from lightroom to JPEG all of the time and upload to Flickr, the exif dat is always there. I'm going to have to figure out what happened but I'll be away for a while so it'll have to wait.
It was shot with 85mm at f8

amehta Loc: Boston

Psergel wrote:

I'm thinking about running a set of exposures focused at different lengths from the nearest bit of branch to the furthest with the aperture wide open. Then stacking for contrast. I might be able to keep the background out of focus completely while still getting all of the tree sharp.
I've played with focus stacking before but only with small close up subjects like flowers. (Approaching "macro")

Interesting. It would be cool if it works for this.

NKN_RKY Loc: Tacoma

Perhaps for different tones you could maybe try bracketing at 3 different exposures when lighting is off and merge them together to get a little more pop. I'm just starting out but I think that would make it sizzle a little.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

Psergel wrote:

I'm thinking about running a set of exposures focused at different lengths from the nearest bit of branch to the furthest with the aperture wide open. Then stacking for contrast. I might be able to keep the background out of focus completely while still getting all of the tree sharp.
I've played with focus stacking before but only with small close up subjects like flowers. (Approaching "macro")

did i hear someone assembling a stack using images with deliberate minimum depth of field? Call the stacking police!!

Mr.HDR Loc: Thailand

Psergel wrote:

So I've been told and I don't know why. I export from lightroom to JPEG all of the time and upload to Flickr, the exif dat is always there. I'm going to have to figure out what happened but I'll be away for a while so it'll have to wait.
It was shot with 85mm at f8

I use lightroom all of the time as this is my entry point, what I mean by that is that I add information to the metadata when in Lightroom and then to assist in my work flow. For me it is just the first step, others however use Lightroom to achieve a final product. When editing an image and then saving it, some programs allow one to remove the metadata file to keep the JPEG as small as possible.
I did a quick and dirty adjustment to your original image using Photomatix
which is a tool used normally to built HDR images from AEB shots. I spent no more that maybe 5 minutes in Photomatix with an intent of giving the image more "POP". The final stage for me is Photoshop CS6 to clean up the image.
Keep up the good work, you have a good eye!

jmhicks

I would open your aperture as wide as you can to minimize the depth of field and blur the background.

rusty nails Loc: Palm Coast FL.

o

rusty nails Loc: Palm Coast FL.

How about a little back ground blur

(Download)

Ace and Deuce Loc: Right behind you!!

My stab at it...

waykee7 Loc: Cortez, Colorado

I live in southwest Colorado and roam around the southwest a lot.

Having shot innumerable failed shots of trees, including making the grey on grey mistake, and shooting trees that I THOUGHT were interesting at the time but ended up boring me later, I've learned STRONG and BOLD form is important. You could be down REALLY low with a wide angle so it's silhouetted against the sky and that will serve to differentiate the tree. But to reiterate, the tree itself is busy and the form doesn't command attention. In my experience, I don't find a pinyon often that interests me, but Utah junipers and alligator bark junipers (Arizona) are far more intriguing. Perhaps some of the PP experts, who are far more adept at blocking the background, could make it work, but I couldn't!

Lens Cap Loc: The Cold North Coast

Pserguel, I thought I would post my try at making your tree "pop". I hope you enjoy.

(Download)

Bigtee Loc: SLC, Utah area

Unless you check the "Store Original" box when you upload,
the forum automaticlly deletes the EXIF data from your photo.

(Being fairly new here I recently read all of the forum rules
etc..)

Good day

PapaMike Loc: Riverside, California

I really like what Lens Cap did with your photo - throwing in the blur in the background. I'm sure it took a good bit of time. It's why knowing depth of field is so important when shooting.