What's new

Advice? Portrait Photos

If people would click the link, you wouldn't have to explain all that Charlie! lol
 
Wrong! Anything under 50mm can have significant distortion (regardless of sensor size), and if used for portraiture... should be far enough away to minimize the distortion. Even a 50mm will do it if too close.
Focal length has nothing to do with this.

You can transform a picture taken by a 35mm, 28mm, 24mm etc into a picture of a 50mm or any longer focal length by just cropping.

The more you crop, the more loss of resolution - however, assuming a perfect lens, there is no distortions introduced or removed. At all !

Even a 14mm (or less, but 14mm is kind of the limit of what still makes sense) will still have perfectly straight lines except for lens errors or if its a fisheye.

The issue is PERSPECTIVE, not lens distortion.

To make a portrait, you want to keep a distance of about 5 meters from the subject. A bit less might still work, and a lot more still causes little problems (people will look somewhat flat though). This limits the range of good focal lengths for portrait to 50mm to 135mm, for full body to face only, and all relative to full frame.

The famous 85mm f/1.2 Canon portrait lens, for example, is right in the middle of this.

Nikon also has famous portrait lenses, the AF 105 or 135mm f/2 DC lenses, which are thus a bit more specialized for face portraiture.


So you are saying you can crop an image made by a 14mm lens and suddenly the subjects nose and anything closer to the camera will suddenly not be HUGE?
 
If people would click the link, you wouldn't have to explain all that Charlie! lol

I agree, but I keep trying to get this information through to Solarflare.. and keep failing. He keeps posting the same incorrect information over and over again. He does love his 35mm 1.8... very much! He defends it like it was his child! But I think I will give up now!
 
Wrong! Anything under 50mm can have significant distortion (regardless of sensor size), and if used for portraiture... should be far enough away to minimize the distortion. Even a 50mm will do it if too close.
Focal length has nothing to do with this.

You can transform a picture taken by a 35mm, 28mm, 24mm etc into a picture of a 50mm or any longer focal length by just cropping.

The more you crop, the more loss of resolution - however, assuming a perfect lens, there is no distortions introduced or removed. At all !

Even a 14mm (or less, but 14mm is kind of the limit of what still makes sense) will still have perfectly straight lines except for lens errors or if its a fisheye.

The issue is PERSPECTIVE, not lens distortion.

To make a portrait, you want to keep a distance of about 5 meters from the subject. A bit less might still work, and a lot more still causes little problems (people will look somewhat flat though). This limits the range of good focal lengths for portrait to 50mm to 135mm, for full body to face only, and all relative to full frame.

The famous 85mm f/1.2 Canon portrait lens, for example, is right in the middle of this.

Nikon also has famous portrait lenses, the AF 105 or 135mm f/2 DC lenses, which are thus a bit more specialized for face portraiture.


So you are saying you can crop an image made by a 14mm lens and suddenly the subjects nose and anything closer to the camera will suddenly not be HUGE?

EXACTLY!!!! lmao!
 
He's saying that if you stand back 5 meters from someone and photograph them with a 14mm lens, the proportions will be "correct" and he's right. The person will also be inconveniently teeny tiny in the middle of the frame.
 
Photo 1 does not suffer from a a focal length/distortion issue. That is not the reason for her elongated face. However, good points were brought up regarding distortion in regards to focal length.

It looks to me like her face was elongated due to improper image resizing in post. Instead of cropping to a square, you made the image dimensions equivalent, thus skewing the photo. Look at the text from image to image. Image one has taller and skinnier text, two has text with the proper proportions.

I am surprised I am the only one who picked up on this.
 
By george, o hey tyler's got it. If you rescale to the proportions of the other it looks almost normal. Still a little forehead enbiggening from leaning in to a too-close camera lens, but it's a heck of a lot more normal looking.

I kinda dig it stretched out, though. It's nothing much at proper scale, but it's... well it's something scaled out like that. The costume suggests a fairy tale, why not make things distorted and dreamlike to support it? It's not fine art, and it's not awesome, but stretching it out didn't hurt it any to my eye.
 
He's saying that if you stand back 5 meters from someone and photograph them with a 14mm lens, the proportions will be "correct" and he's right. The person will also be inconveniently teeny tiny in the middle of the frame.

Exactly again!

"But you are right that at 5 meters.. the distortion will be minimized on lenses below 50mm.. but then, so will the subject!
 
I kinda like the distortion in the first shot. Although not written by the Gimm brothers, Little Red Riding Hood in the image has that little bit of wickedness showing, which is intriguing.
 
Man, same discussion again all over ? We already cleared that up over a month ago ...


Wrong! Anything under 50mm can have significant distortion (regardless of sensor size), and if used for portraiture... should be far enough away to minimize the distortion. Even a 50mm will do it if too close.

Focal length has nothing to do with this.

You can transform a picture taken by a 35mm, 28mm, 24mm etc into a picture of a 50mm or any longer focal length by just cropping.

Wrong! You can approximate the FOV.. but you cannot change the distortion by doing so!



yes on the loss of resolution! There is no PERFECT lens.. and anything under 50mm will have visible distortion at some distances)



It is called Barrel Distortion.. and it is not a perspective issue....

To make a portrait, you want to keep a distance of about 5 meters from the subject. A bit less might still work, and a lot more still causes little problems (people will look somewhat flat though). This limits the range of good focal lengths for portrait to 50mm to 135mm, for full body to face only, and all relative to full frame.

5 meters??? maybe with my 85mm or my 70-200... unless you are talking full body portraits. But you are right that at 5 meters.. the distortion will be minimized on lenses below 50mm.. but then, so will the subject!

The famous 85mm f/1.2 Canon portrait lens, for example, is right in the middle of this.

Nikon also has famous portrait lenses, the AF 105 or 135mm f/2 DC lenses, which are thus a bit more specialized for face portraiture.

Yes.. funny how most acknowledged portrait lenses are 50mm and up.. not 50mm and below!

This is extreme b.s.

Even if there would be a law of physics that wide lenses have to have barrel distortion, digital cameras could still compensate for it.


If people would click the link, you wouldn't have to explain all that Charlie! lol
The link makes my point most beautifully.

The photographer took the same frame with different focal lengths.

If you keep the same distance (5m) and crop, the pictures will look exactly the same.

The problem is the perspective, not the focal length.
 
mmmmmmmkay... I think we've chased off the new girl now.
 
mmmmmmmkay... I think we've chased off the new girl now.

nope. I'm just interested in all the opinions that have been given :)
So thank you everyone for your opinions :)
When I did take these photos I was using my point and shoot Olympus camera. But now I just recently brought a Canon EOS 1000D and will try out all other the advice. :)
 
Man, same discussion again all over ? We already cleared that up over a month ago ...


Wrong! Anything under 50mm can have significant distortion (regardless of sensor size), and if used for portraiture... should be far enough away to minimize the distortion. Even a 50mm will do it if too close.



Wrong! You can approximate the FOV.. but you cannot change the distortion by doing so!



yes on the loss of resolution! There is no PERFECT lens.. and anything under 50mm will have visible distortion at some distances)



It is called Barrel Distortion.. and it is not a perspective issue....



5 meters??? maybe with my 85mm or my 70-200... unless you are talking full body portraits. But you are right that at 5 meters.. the distortion will be minimized on lenses below 50mm.. but then, so will the subject!



Yes.. funny how most acknowledged portrait lenses are 50mm and up.. not 50mm and below!

This is extreme b.s.

Even if there would be a law of physics that wide lenses have to have barrel distortion, digital cameras could still compensate for it.


If people would click the link, you wouldn't have to explain all that Charlie! lol
The link makes my point most beautifully.

The photographer took the same frame with different focal lengths.

If you keep the same distance (5m) and crop, the pictures will look exactly the same.

The problem is the perspective, not the focal length.

extreme B.S. huh? lol! I won't even bother trying to help you understand in the future! You remind me of someone else here!
 
I think you should use a slightly longer focal length because her face in the first photo looks a bit too stretched up to me.
If you use a compact camera: just zoom in a bit and take some steps back to get about the same frame with less stretching.

a focal length of 24 or 35mm would be super!

oh wait sorry, compact camera... disregard.

Wrong! Anything under 50mm can have significant distortion (regardless of sensor size), and if used for portraiture... should be far enough away to minimize the distortion. Even a 50mm will do it if too close.

I don't know, my 24mm produces some pretty great results a 5 ft away.

The problem is the perspective, not the focal length.
 
extreme B.S. huh? lol! I won't even bother trying to help you understand in the future! You remind me of someone else here!

You cant make people "understand" that 1 + 1 = 3.

Because its wrong.

We already had this discussion before and I'm not really interested in a repetition of it.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom