C & C please

[True_Shot]

Just walking around my property this afternoon with my 55mm-250mm lens and decided to take some time to try to capture some pictures. C and C please

123mm ISO100 F-Stop 5 1/400sec

250mm ISO800 F-Stop 5.6 1/1600sec

55mm ISO400 F-Stop 4.5 1/2500sec

250mm ISO400 F-stop 14 (1/100sec)

 

[EIngerson]

In #1, the bokeh is great, but the colors from the grass in the background really distract you from the subject. The subject is tack sharp though.

#2 I'm kind of ehhhhh, on this one. Not much to it in my eyes.

#3 again, ehhhh frosen pot of water. Sharp, and vibrant, but ehhhh.

#4 That branch in front of the bird? Damn. Would be a stunning image if it wasn't for that.

That's what I got. Thanks for sharing your work.

 

[True_Shot]

In #1, the bokeh is great, but the colors from the grass in the background really distract you from the subject. The subject is tack sharp though.

#2 I'm kind of ehhhhh, on this one. Not much to it in my eyes.

#3 again, ehhhh frosen pot of water. Sharp, and vibrant, but ehhhh.

#4 That branch in front of the bird? Damn. Would be a stunning image if it wasn't for that.

That's what I got. Thanks for sharing your work.

Thanks for the quick feedback haha
I know I was tempted to move the branch, but the bird didn't seem like it would have stayed to co-operate

And I'll have to pick some more interesting subjects I guess now...

 

[eddlum25]

1. Soft focus. Try to shot at f8 which should give better focus.

2. Try to shot at much lower shutter speed to give a blurry effect on water.

3. No comment. Too big of aperture. Again try shot at f8.


4. Tad overexpose.

 

[True_Shot]

1. Soft focus. Try to shot at f8 which should give better focus.

2. Try to shot at much lower shutter speed to give a blurry effect on water.

3. No comment. Too big of aperture. Again try shot at f8.


4. Tad overexpose.

Thanks for the feedback.... it's funny how its the exact opposite opinion of the guy who just critiqued it haha

 

[EIngerson]

Yeah, sorry eddlum25, in #1 you're not going to see hair size strands seperated from weeds in the background unless the it's very sharp. There is nothing OOF about that image except the background.

Google BOKEH.

 

[eddlum25]

1. Soft focus. Try to shot at f8 which should give better focus.

2. Try to shot at much lower shutter speed to give a blurry effect on water.

3. No comment. Too big of aperture. Again try shot at f8.


4. Tad overexpose.

Typing mistake

4. Tad overexpose. Too big of aperture. Again try shot at f8.

 

[True_Shot]

1. Soft focus. Try to shot at f8 which should give better focus.

2. Try to shot at much lower shutter speed to give a blurry effect on water.

3. No comment. Too big of aperture. Again try shot at f8.


4. Tad overexpose.

Typing mistake

4. Tad overexpose. Too big of aperture. Again try shot at f8.

Okay thanks

 

[KmH]

Google BOKEH.

I did. Well, I Bing'd bokeh.

What I learned is that bokeh is a word made up in 1997 by the editor of Photo Techniques magazine. The editor learned the Japanese word, boke, meant blur or haze but apparently missed that the Japanese word boke is also used in the context of a mental haze, or senility.

I also learned the new made up word refers to the aesthetic quality of the blur in out-of-focus (OOF) areas of an image, or "the way the lens renders out-of-focus points of light".

Further investigation lead me to understand that bokeh is not adjustable because it is an inherent property of the lens construction, there are 2 kinds, and that many people use the term bokeh incorrectly to describe a shallow depth-of-field (DoF) or blurred background.
Apparently, the number and shape of the lens aperture blades is a major factor in determining the aesthetic quality of the blur in out-of-focus areas of an image, with the shape of the lens aperture the aperture blades form having an marked influence on the subjective quality of bokeh. The closer to perfectly round the lens aperture is, the higher the aesthetic quality of the blur in out-of-focus (OOF) areas of an image will usually be.

In short, not all lenses that can produce a shallow DoF, also produce good or quality bokeh.

For example Canon's inexpensive EF 50 mm f/1.8 II lens is touted for it's ability to produce a shallow DoF, but the aesthic quality of the out-of-focus (OOF) area the lens produces is considered jittery, jarring, nervous appearing, and generally of very poor quality. The lens only has 5 aperture blades, they are not curved, they have sharp edges, and they don't come close to making a round lens aperture.
Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II Lens Review: 5. Conclusion & samples: Digital Photography Review

Conclusion - Cons
Harsh and distracting bokeh due to pentagonal aperture

By the same token Nikon's AF 85 mm f/1.4D lens has been nicknamed "The Cream Machine" because of the ultra smooth, very pleasing visual quality of the OOF areas it produces. the lens has 9 curved aperture blades, and the blade edges are also curved so the lens aperture is a fairly close approximation to a perfect circle.

As far as image #1 the OP posted the brighter brown blurred background elements form nice leading lines to the intended main subject. The lighting leaves some to be desired because the stem is heavily shadowed.

You might want to Google/Bing/Ask: Depth-of-field, Circle of Confusion, and Airy disk.

 

[True_Shot]

As far as image #1 the OP posted the brighter brown blurred background elements form nice leading lines to the intended main subject. The lighting leaves some to be desired because the stem is heavily shadowed.

Thanks for the critique! Even if it was only one line out of quite a few haha