How to get razor sharp focus + portrait editing ideas?

[Designer]

I shot the below picture ..

I attempted to see the focus points, and was unable to see them, because too much information was stripped from the image as you have posted it. You can do this yourself: Turn on the focus area indicators either in your camera or in your editing software, and verify that the focus area is actually where it should be, namely; on your subject's eye. My hunch is that the camera focused on her hair (left shoulder area) so obviously her face will not be in focus, given the extremely shallow DOF resulting from the f/1.8 aperture and close distance.

BTW: I made a photograph of something that was only about two feet from the lens and a fairly wide aperture, and it was acceptably sharp.

Here is a 100% crop from a shot taken at f/5:

Same lens at f/5

 

[Inklingforsake]

The 50G is a great lens and sharp, just hard to nail focus at 1.8 but it can be done with enough patience. Make sure your shutter speed doesn't drop too low either and look for the right light.

At close distances with the 50mm lens on an APS-C or "DX" camera, here's what DOF Master, the online depth of field computing web page, comes up with. I made this screen capture just a minute ago. In your shot #1, see how her chin and teeth seem to be in the best focus, but the hair and eyes are ever-so-slightly less well-focused? THAT is the tricky thing with a 50mm lens at close distances at f/1.8...the DOF band is .21 foot deep...that's two-tenths of one foot...and the area in front of the actual focus point, and the area behind the focus point--both are exceptionally narrow zones!

View attachment 135549

You have 1/10 of one foot in front of the focus point, and about the same behind the actual focus distance. This means that there will be only a very narrow band that appears truly sharp; if the eyes are sharp, that usually helps. In your Shot #1 it appears to me that the teeth and chin were what the AF system locked onto, and that allowed the eyes to be just slightly out of the narrow DOF zone.

One tip is to shoot from 7 feet, and not much closer, for any person-shot. That keeps the nose and chin and forehead from looking unnaturally enlarged. Inside of 7 feet, and there is what's called perspective distortion. it's better to be a biut farther away, and then to crop a high-megapixel image, like the D3400 makes, a solid 24 million pixel image. Being at the 7 to 10 foot distance will create more of the appearance of sharpness that makes things Pop!

I was indeed standing very close to the subject. Great observation. Thank you! Thank you for introducing me to DOF master too!

 

[Inklingforsake]

[/QUOTE]Why are you "trying too hard"? Does not the lens focus itself? Of course it does, so what effort do you think you are required to exert?
[/QUOTE]

So on auto focus, when I half-press the shutter button (or when I hit back button focus) it does a little beep and even when I have my focus area selected (single point) the beep highlights another area elsewhere. I have to keep hitting the focus buttons until it goes to the area I want focused. I don't have this problem with manual focus but I keep wondering why the auto focus troubles me.

But like Derrel mentioned, I think I just stand too close to the subject. I have got to try moving farther away.

 

[Inklingforsake]

I shot the below picture ..

I attempted to see the focus points, and was unable to see them, because too much information was stripped from the image as you have posted it. You can do this yourself: Turn on the focus area indicators either in your camera or in your editing software, and verify that the focus area is actually where it should be, namely; on your subject's eye. My hunch is that the camera focused on her hair (left shoulder area) so obviously her face will not be in focus, given the extremely shallow DOF resulting from the f/1.8 aperture and close distance.

BTW: I made a photograph of something that was only about two feet from the lens and a fairly wide aperture, and it was acceptably sharp.

Here is a 100% crop from a shot taken at f/5:

View attachment 135552

Same lens at f/5

Thank you. I am going to go down two f stops and try!

 

[astroNikon]

So on auto focus, when I half-press the shutter button (or when I hit back button focus) it does a little beep and even when I have my focus area selected (single point) the beep highlights another area elsewhere. I have to keep hitting the focus buttons until it goes to the area I want focused. I don't have this problem with manual focus but I keep wondering why the auto focus troubles me.

But like Derrel mentioned, I think I just stand too close to the subject. I have got to try moving farther away.

You need to learn about Focus Modes and Focus Areas to control this aspect for what you want to do, versus letting the camera decide for you.

Set the camera up to AF-S Single Focus Mode and Area.
I'll find the page in your manual ....

 

[Derrel]

I think the issue is that you have what used to be called Automatic AF Area Selection set to be enabled. This is a Custom Function preference that needs to be changed by the user. This can also be the behavior used by other Custom Function modes in a Nikon camera. Some of the "Group AF" modes, ones which use multiple points, can also behave the way you're talking about.

As soon as I read a more specific description, I realized why you're having trouble! "and even when I have my focus area selected (single point) the beep highlights another area elsewhere." ----YOU ARE NOT FULLY in Single-Point AF mode,as evidenced by this exact behavior.

Time to dig into the D3400 Instruction manual and AF modes and figure out the best way to negate this issue that is bugging you.

 

[astroNikon]

Here's 2 pages from the D3300 manual about Focus Mode and Focus Area (your D3400 should be very similar).
For Portraiture it is best to be in AF-S
and to get a single focus point to, for instance focus on a persons eye, you want Single Focus Point.

This will let *you* choose where to focus on, and not let the camera choose for you which as you can see can be arbitrary.

 

[Inklingforsake]

Ha! I get it now. I finally understand what I was doing wrong.

Good people, I cannot thank you enough!!!


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[vintagesnaps]

The shutter speed seems faster than necessary if you're not trying to freeze action. I'd suggest you get out & about, just you and your camera, and learn how the camera settings work together. Try different apertures and take pictures of the same scene/setting and see how that changes the images.

You need a lot more practice than you can probably get in just three months. Learn how to frame shots, the subject is rather too low in the frame in the first one. Notice backgrounds and change your vantage point, be aware of people moving in and out of the scene. It would've helped for the hair to be combed/arranged so she doesn't look windblown.

There's not necessarily a right or wrong but I focus manually because autofocus isn't precise enough for me - experiment and see what works best for you. Try searching 'elements of composition in art' and that should bring up some resources.

 

[Inklingforsake]

The shutter speed seems faster than necessary if you're not trying to freeze action. I'd suggest you get out & about, just you and your camera, and learn how the camera settings work together. Try different apertures and take pictures of the same scene/setting and see how that changes the images.

You need a lot more practice than you can probably get in just three months. Learn how to frame shots, the subject is rather too low in the frame in the first one. Notice backgrounds and change your vantage point, be aware of people moving in and out of the scene. It would've helped for the hair to be combed/arranged so she doesn't look windblown.

There's not necessarily a right or wrong but I focus manually because autofocus isn't precise enough for me - experiment and see what works best for you. Try searching 'elements of composition in art' and that should bring up some resources.

Yes, sir! I am learning as much as I can. Thanks to you all.

It was very bright there and I increased the shutter speed to get it to be darker. Is that a wrong move? I also went a few stops down on Exposure.

 

[dasmith232]

...It was very bright there and I increased the shutter speed to get it to be darker. Is that a wrong move? I also went a few stops down on Exposure.

Increased the shutter speed, but in which mode? That could be "manual" but the comment about "also going down a few stops" doesn't seem to fit.

If it's any other mode, then shifting the shutter speed faster will cause the camera to compensate in some other way to get back to a "standard" exposure. This makes "shifting the shutter speed" mostly irrelevant.

The part about "going down a few stops" seems like you'd be using exposure compensation. Can you include information about what mode you're shooting in?

 

[Inklingforsake]

...It was very bright there and I increased the shutter speed to get it to be darker. Is that a wrong move? I also went a few stops down on Exposure.

Increased the shutter speed, but in which mode? That could be "manual" but the comment about "also going down a few stops" doesn't seem to fit.

If it's any other mode, then shifting the shutter speed faster will cause the camera to compensate in some other way to get back to a "standard" exposure. This makes "shifting the shutter speed" mostly irrelevant.

The part about "going down a few stops" seems like you'd be using exposure compensation. Can you include information about what mode you're shooting in?

I was on "M" Manual mode and yes, I meant Exposure Compensation for the few stops lower. I was at -0.3 and I could have gone lower than that I guess? Versus increasing the shutter speed?

Settings used: 1/350 f/1.8 ISO 200 and no flash

 

[dasmith232]

Your camera might(?) be different, but I think the way that is works is this.

When in Manual mode, you set both aperture and shutter (that part's certain). If the ISO speed is set to "auto" then exposure compensation will have an effect (darker by 1/3 stop in this case). But if the ISO speed is manually set (as in this case at 200) then the exposure is not affected by exposure compensation. Rather, the metering will now read 1/3 stop darker just to help you make exposure decisions; it doesn't actually change the exposure.

I only mention this to help explain how the camera works. The fewer unknowns or mysteries, the easier it is to control things for a great image.

 

[Inklingforsake]

But if the ISO speed is manually set (as in this case at 200) then the exposure is not affected by exposure compensation. Rather, the metering will now read 1/3 stop darker just to help you make exposure decisions; it doesn't actually change the exposure.

I did not know this.... thank you!

 

[Derrel]

This is with a moderately heavy vignette added, and +61 Sharpening just painted on to the face and hair above the mouth and teeth, in Lightroom.

This is how shot #1 looks with a white balance shift, away from the overly warm original, to a more neutral WB, and then the horizontal framing cropped to a more square, sort of a "Profile Shot" aspect ratio.

Some minor white balance tweaking on shot #2, lightening of the coat, and a very slight vignette.