Group of 4 kids aperture???

tmjjk · Aug 8, 2012

I would like your advice on camera settings. Group of four children, daylight, shooting aperture priority. I typically shoot single subjects and I am worried about getting everyone in focus. My signature shows my camera and lenses. I would like to create bokeh behind my subjects, but it's not necessary. I've tried dofmaster... And I can't grasp it... Sorry if this is a stupid question.

OLaA · Aug 8, 2012

Find some where shaded. Open up the aperture as much as possible. Raise shutter speed to compensate for exposure. Also make sure there's distance between subjects and background. Not sure what lenses you have as my mobile app doesn't show sig. But if you're not getting them as sharp as you'd like up the aperture, and move them further away from background to get the bokeh you're looking for. Hope this helps.

tmjjk · Aug 8, 2012

Canon 50mm 1.8
Canon 50mm 1.4
Canon 55-200 4.5-5.6(?)
Canon xs...
I am worried with a completely open aperture I will not get them in focus??

Derrel · Aug 8, 2012

tmjjk said:
Canon 50mm 1.8
Canon 50mm 1.4
Canon 55-200 4.5-5.6(?)
Canon xs...
I am worried with a completely open aperture I will not get them in focus??

QUITE possible if the depth of the group is very large. You would ideally, like to have each person very close to the same distance from the lens, in order to ensure that you can "cover" with whatever DOF band depth you have. Now, at CLOSE distances, a group of four at f/4.5 could very well wind up with one person out of focus a bit...a smaller aperture like f/8 would definitely be safer. Now....if you shoot from a LONGER DISTANCE, and do not frame the group super-tightly, or show them at a really tight, close-up type of shot, you'll be "okay".

SO, to recap...try and keep the people all close to the same distance from the camera....do not zoom in too tightly, and do NOT shoot from like 8 feet....back away, and THEN use f/4.5 or f/5.6 on your tele-zoom, OR, use your 50mm lens set to about f/2.5 to f/3.2, from a distance of about 15 feet or so, and you will be okay if you keep your wits about you and pay attention.

The second tip: DO NOT SHOOT A GROUP PORTRAIT AT ISO 100 if you are a beginner. Just DON'T--it ruins more group shots than it helps. Trust me...boost that ISO UP, to 400. You can thank me later.

tmjjk · Aug 8, 2012

That is exactly what I wanted to know!! You answered my question perfectly and I understood the answer!! Yay! Lol. Thanks so much Derrel. I know how I am going to set up my scene tonight, but just for an overall understanding... If I am further away from my subject(s), than the area in focus increases? And is that what depth of field is? The area in focus? So scared to post some of these questions for fear if losing any credibility. Afraid you guys will give up on me if I sound like I need too much help.

Derrel · Aug 8, 2012

Yes, Depth of Field is the area that is in "acceptably sharp" focus. The ABSOLUTE, most-CRITICAL area is always the specific distance the lens is focused upon, BUT, in real-world terms, as the camera is focused farther and farther away, the amount of acceptably in-focus real estate gets "deeper"...more distance, from near to far, will be in focus when shooting at a 20-foot focusing disatance than when shooting with the lens set to, say, 3 feet.

Password Protected Image

Tanya, 85mm f/1.4 AF-D lens, focused at 1.5 meters, shot at f/4 at 1/400 second at ISO 250, in sweltering shade. NOT much DOF, but enough to make a pretty picture of ONE person.

Tanya and VirLynda shot with a 105mm lens set to f/4--NOT ENOUGH DOF To "cover"--my bad!

VirLynda,Tanya,and Renee, shot from much farther away, with a 200mm lens, at f/5 (yes f FIVE, even), at 1/200 second, ISO 250. Has just enough Depth of Field to cover the group.

tmjjk · Aug 9, 2012

I feel so enlightened

It's like a light turned on. Sure it's a fairly simple concept, but until someone tells you what it is... I thank you Derrel. Unfortunately I cannot see the examples you posted for me. Password protected image... but I did play around with the suggestions you offered and my "group image" came out better than any before (technically anyway) I of course missed some junk in the background..

.