How to achieve this look?

conan. · May 15, 2009

moderators, please move this out of 'beyond basics'. Preferably make a subforum called 'pre-basics' or 'total noobs'.

ANDS! · May 15, 2009

craig said:
With all due respect and I hate to detract from a valid thread (sans posted photos). Are you on glue? As photographers we MUST respect each others work.

I'm assuming the OP posted the images without a link back to the images? If so, then sure you could make an argument about "Oh bad photographer!" It's still a weak one.

abraxas · May 15, 2009

~Stella~ said:
I believe it's forum policy to post only photos you have legal rights to. That said, you can post links to anyone's images for discussion purposes.

Mtalicarox said:
I think you're correct but is it up to every member to check on that? Or is it up to admins and moderators?

craig said:
With all due respect and I hate to detract from a valid thread (sans posted photos). Are you on glue? As photographers we MUST respect each others work. Photography is a tough racket. Credit where credit is due is an unwritten law. It is the responsibility of every individual and not the mods.

Love & Bass

ANDS! said:
I'm assuming the OP posted the images without a link back to the images? If so, then sure you could make an argument about "Oh bad photographer!" It's still a weak one.

I'm glad this was brought up. Posting photos by others without their permission is a rude and inconsiderate imposition. It's the responsibility of the OP to know this, not the moderator's job to enforce. And as a matter of respect a link or links should be to the page they are on instead of just a liink to the photo. Linking to the image alone is also a matter of disrespect, showing the image out of the context it was meant to be displayed in.

Iron Flatline · May 16, 2009

Meh, I really don't think it's a big deal in this context. The OP never pretended they were his, if anything there was admiration as he was asking how he (or she) might achieve this kind of effect. I think for the purposes of discussion (creative, craft) it should be ok.

The problem is that the owners of the site generate a little bit of money off ads, and as such the re-use of an image here puts them in an awkward situation should the owner of the images actually be mad about this kind of usage. (Pay a subscription, people!)

That's theoretical of course... I doubt the page views of this thread amount to more than 2 cents worth of media coverage.

A lot of members benefit from this kind of technical discussion, I wish we were less uptight about it. There's a lot to be learned from good images, but I guess we'll just open a second tab and view the image on its site of origin. Maybe we could permit it provided the person posting can give name credit to the photographer.

bar-elo, I get that look with my Canon 50mm 1.4

ANDS! · May 16, 2009

Meh, I really don't think it's a big deal in this context. The OP never pretended they were his, if anything there was admiration as he was asking how he (or she) might achieve this kind of effect. I think for the purposes of discussion (creative, craft) it should be ok.

+A-Gajillion. I think, when the OP refused to see it the way the rest of The Mod demanded he see it, everyone started to get all pantie-twisted.

Charlie Norton · May 17, 2009

The longer focal length does not mean a shallower depth of field. The longer focal length lens will of course give a narrower field of view and a narrower field of view will have a shallower depth of field at the same distance. So, a close up of a subject at f4 with a 50mm lens will have the same depth of field as the same close up of the subject at f4 with a 200mm lens. The camera will be farther from the subject and the background will be magnified but the depth of field is in fact the same.

Kind regards,

Neal Norton

Mtalicarox · May 18, 2009

JerryPH said:
Not to be an ass, but is it not the responsibility of EACH member to read the rules and follow them and not need to be hand held like a child through all the simple and obvious things?

"* You agree to only post images and/or other material to which you have exclusive copyright, or permission from the copyright holder that you are able to present to TPF Staff. Under no circumstances will any instance of copyright infringement be tolerated."

That's what I was saying.. it's not up to members to tell each other. It's up to the mod's. Was more of a rhetorical question..

Mtalicarox · May 18, 2009

craig said:
With all due respect and I hate to detract from a valid thread (sans posted photos). Are you on glue? As photographers we MUST respect each others work. Photography is a tough racket. Credit where credit is due is an unwritten law. It is the responsibility of every individual and not the mods.

Love & Bass

I am not on glue. Respect is earned - it is not given. Basic courtesy is encouraged. I'm just saying it's stupid for one person to instead of answer the question be all "ZOMG WERED YEW GET THAT IMAGEZZ! IT NEEDZ 2 B PROPPERIE SOURCEDZ!" And if it's an unwritten law - then by definition - it doesn't need to be followed. I agree it is also the responsibility of everymember not to take credit for pictures that aren't theirs... this being said, asking how something is done clearly by posting pictures CLEARLY means he doesn't know how to do it, so the pictures CAN'T be his.

abraxas said:
I'm glad this was brought up. Posting photos by others without their permission is a rude and inconsiderate imposition. It's the responsibility of the OP to know this, not the moderator's job to enforce. And as a matter of respect a link or links should be to the page they are on instead of just a liink to the photo. Linking to the image alone is also a matter of disrespect, showing the image out of the context it was meant to be displayed in.

What's with all the respect junkies in here? Not everyone deserves respect. It is earned, common courtesy is what is owed to someone you don't know. Also respect is in the eye of the beholder, its an opinion if something is respectful or not, so any argument relying upon somethign that to each individual is different is inherently a flawed argument. Perhaps to some having their photo used as an example of something someone thinks as awesome is the most respect that can be paid to them.

I don't use other peoples images without asking or linking, however this being said it's not on my shoulders to point out that someone else needs to do so. If he was making money off posting those, yes, if he was claiming credit, yes.. when he's asking for knowledge, Never.

SrBiscuit · May 18, 2009

Mtalicarox said:
That's what I was saying.. it's not up to members to tell each other. It's up to the mod's. Was more of a rhetorical question..

i dont think youre getting what jerry was saying.
i'll see if i can simplify it...

there is a rule. it says dont post others' work without permission.
it is up to each new member to READ the rules and abide by them.
the mod's make the rule. our duty as members is to follow them.
huh-huh i said duty.

:hug::

those images are nice, however.
the temperature seems rather cool in many of them, and DOF is definitely a factor

Mtalicarox · May 18, 2009

SrBiscuit said:
i dont think youre getting what jerry was saying.
i'll see if i can simplify it...

there is a rule. it says dont post others' work without permission.
it is up to each new member to READ the rules and abide by them.
the mod's make the rule. our duty as members is to follow them.
huh-huh i said duty.

:hug::

those images are nice, however.
the temperature seems rather cool in many of them, and DOF is definitely a factor

I understand that. However we must abide by the rules, if rules are broken, we are not the rule enforcers. that is what I am saying.

JerryPH · May 19, 2009

Mtalicarox said:
we are not the rule enforcers. that is what I am saying.

We are not, if we were, we would have modified, deleted or moved your post. We as responsible users who care about this forum just tapped you on the shoulder and set you straight on something so that YOU could fix it. The mods have enough on their plates without needing to police every new users on things that they should know about before posting.

bdavison · May 19, 2009

Back to the original topic...sheesh.

If you dont have a lens or cant achieve the DOF needed for those shots, PaintShopPro X2 has a nifty tool called "Depth of Field" that allows you to simulate it.

Here is an example of what it can do.

Double H · May 19, 2009

While we are on the subject of shallow DOF, I will make it clear that I believe in 'Selective Focus' not "Bokeh." :sexywink:

JerryPH · May 19, 2009

bdavison said:
Back to the original topic...sheesh.

If you dont have a lens or cant achieve the DOF needed for those shots, PaintShopPro X2 has a nifty tool called "Depth of Field" that allows you to simulate it.

If you need to simulate background blur, you do not understand how DOF works, nor how to generate it. I can get very strong bokeh at apertures as small as F/7.1... in the foreground *and* the background.

EXIF to support this is on THIS PAGE.

I can also give you a picture taken at an aperture of F/1.4 *without blur*!

EXIF to support this is on THIS PAGE.

In other words... give me almost ANY lens, and I will be able to blur the background for you and give me the FASTEST lens you can find and I can give you a picture with ZERO blur in it.

One just needs to understand that blurring the background is more than just aperture.