Aperture, faster shutter or live with it.

[Thwarp]

You can avoid the moire by using an older camera with an anti-alias screen. There was a reason cameras used to have them.

That's exactly the best way to describe the issue. Man that must seem noobish of me to use "screen bow".
By older camera, do you mean a lesser model like a Nikon D3100 or actually older in the realm of old film style?

 

[KmH]

Moiré is a digital camera phenomena, so yes, an older DLSR that has the older type anti-aliasing (AA) filter in front on the image sensor.

 

[Thwarp]

The issue is called Moiré.

What is Moiré?

It's definitely moire. The picture uploaded doesn't demonstrate it well due to size constraints of forum limits on uploads.
But it's huge in the original and most displeasing in the shot.

But for KmH the 3rd definition of Webster is the most accurate for our use.

"" an independent usually shimmering pattern seen when two geometrically regular patterns (such as two sets of parallel lines or two halftone screens) are superimposed especially at an acute angle"

Take a picture of a window screen at yer house at an acute angle as though yer looking parallel to it. You'll see moire. Parallel lines and vertical lines will overlap and warp a lot.

 

[Derrel]

If you had a lens with front swing, you could have turned the lens to the left a few degrees, and placed the depth of field band so that it would have had more of the window screening in-focus.

Second option: add LIGHT, and stop the lens down to about f/22, and focus by hand-and-eye, and you could likely get more into good focus by "placing" the depth of field band a bit more optimally.

This is exactly the kind of thing a lens, or camera that has front standard (the lens end of the camera) movements could have helped with.

Similar problems crop up in MUCH close-in work with cameras that have a rigid, non-moving front and rear standard. The kitty shot is the exact type of scenario where a camera with movements could help with!

"swing" is what would be beat for this scenario; the cheapest lens with front swing would be a Lensbaby. Other options would be like the Zork adapter, or the Altax, and a lens, stopped down to say f/22 or so.

 

[Thwarp]

If you had a lens with front swing, you could have turned the lens to the left a few degrees, and placed the depth of field band so that it would have had more of the window screening in-focus.

Second option: add LIGHT, and stop the lens down to about f/22, and focus by hand-and-eye, and you could likely get more into good focus by "placing" the depth of field band a bit more optimally.

This is exactly the kind of thing a lens, or camera that has front standard (the lens end of the camera) movements could have helped with.

Similar problems crop up in MUCH close-in work with cameras that have a rigid, non-moving front and rear standard. The kitty shot is the exact type of scenario where a camera with movements could help with!

"swing" is what would be beat for this scenario; the cheapest lens with front swing would be a Lensbaby. Other options would be like the Zork adapter, or the Altax, and a lens, stopped down to say f/22 or so.

Thanks for the excellent advice and tips here! As it is right now, I'll be best served by taking yer advice buy adjusting aperture down and getting closer to the screen (I could have done that). But I'll be looking up those lenses you quoted and most likely putting em on the wish list.

I'm just a noob barely out of diapers. I think it's best I learn to adjust my technique(s) and settings before spoiling myself on lens acquisition(s). When the time is right, and I hope that time comes sooner than later, I will upgrade from the D5100 to the d7500 or better depending on the time and Nikon new model releases, then get some advanced optics.

For now the 18-140 & 70-300ED's are serving me extremely well .

 

[vintagesnaps]

I thought you meant the screen was actually bowed out, like in a screen door where kids are in and out all the time and people push on it instead of the doorframe so eventually it gets bowed... I can't tell in the picture, it just looks soft or out of focus.

Frame tighter and have less screen in the picture next time. Hardly seems worth a lens, even though a Lensbaby can be fun, unless you want one for other purposes than to provide cat background.

Or get your cat to put on a rodeo and you're good.
(That's a nice picture, just practice keeping the camera straight; I've done sports and it can be more noticeable with all the lines and posts and poles and bleachers and signs.)

 

[Thwarp]

I thought you meant the screen was actually bowed out, like in a screen door where kids are in and out all the time and people push on it instead of the doorframe so eventually it gets bowed... I can't tell in the picture, it just looks soft or out of focus.

Frame tighter and have less screen in the picture next time. Hardly seems worth a lens, even though a Lensbaby can be fun, unless you want one for other purposes than to provide cat background.

Or get your cat to put on a rodeo and you're good.
(That's a nice picture, just practice keeping the camera straight; I've done sports and it can be more noticeable with all the lines and posts and poles and bleachers and signs.)

Thanks about keeping the camera straight. In that rodeo, my place in the stands wasn't so great so it was difficult sitting on top of the back of the aluminum bleachers and keeping up with the action and trying to dodge the visual obstructions like light poles, mounted speaker towers closer to the arena.

But I'll gets betters ;-)

 

[weepete]

I'll go for the simple answer, get a better background.

 

[Braineack]

The area I'd like to learn how to improve without the need for post production is the apparent "screen-bow". As you can seen behind the kit-t a nice blur is apparent. But as you get away from it, it actually becomes annoying to the viewer and in my opinion, makes the eye stray from the subject.

you missed the focus so your eyes narrow in on the screen in front of the cat -- which is the only thing in focus in the image...

 

[Derrel]

Had this been shot with a _powerful_ electronic flash unit bounced off of the ceiling or a wall, you could easily have stopped the lens down to f/22 and had pretty deep depth of field, even at close distance. By powerful, I mean something like a $100-$249, 150 Watt-second studio flash unit that plugs into AC wall current and is placed on a light stand, or a powerful, handle-mount type flash of the "potato masher" style, like my old Sunpak 622 Super, or a big Metz 45 or 60-series potato masher.

Don't worry about people cautioning you about losing sharpness due to diffraction at f/16 or at f/22: the bigger issue is depth of field, and getting enough to keep things simply in focus! When you shoot close-up like this cat shot, stopping the lens down to the smallest aperture (usually f/16, f/22 on some lenses, f/32 on most macro lenses) is the way most seasoned shooters approach things. Of course, you'll want your sensor to be clean when you stop down that far! Sensor specks look like pepper flecks when the lens is topped way down.

Anyway...as waday mentioned, looking for clean, good backgrounds is a great idea when photographing cats.