NSFW Portrait for class

[DanOstergren25]

These went over quite well in class despite the various issues, so I am thankful for that. But I still want to reshoot with the advice I have been given.

Congrats on the good results in class! I'm excited to see what you do next.

 

[DiskoJoe]

These went over quite well in class despite the various issues, so I am thankful for that. But I still want to reshoot with the advice I have been given.

Congrats on the good results in class! I'm excited to see what you do next.

More of the same, but better, hopefully.

 

[Ftwopoint8]

The background background seemed distracting but nonetheless very nice photography with great expressions

I have to do two indoor portraits using ambient light which I havent really ever done nor have I ever done a "sexy" photo. The girlfriend and I gave it a go for practice and came up with this shot. We were limited to my apartment but I dont think it came out bad. I wanted to blow out the back ground so you couldnt see the neighbors house


Anyway, Id love some feed back





I hate the railing but there wasnt much I could do. I was thinking about buying a thin white bed sheet and hanging it outside to create softer light and a less distracting back ground

 

[SoulfulRecover]

These went over quite well in class despite the various issues, so I am thankful for that. But I still want to reshoot with the advice I have been given.

Congrats on the good results in class! I'm excited to see what you do next.

More of the same, but better, hopefully.

I hope so too!

 

[hopdaddy]

Do you focus and then recompose or do you move the focus point in your camera to the eyes ,then shoot ? I have found that when I recompose ,my photos will end up a bit soft . I feel the roundness of the lens (Not all lens are rounded ) will cause this problem ...........Just a thought .

 

[DanOstergren25]

Do you focus and then recompose or do you move the focus point in your camera to the eyes ,then shoot ? I have found that when I recompose ,my photos will end up a bit soft . I feel the roundness of the lens (Not all lens are rounded ) will cause this problem ...........Just a thought .

I focus and then recompose. I was wondering if this has been affecting how accurate my focus has been lately.

 

[amolitor]

Focus&Recompose is often trotted out as a problem, and usually it's not. If you're swinging in the camera through a couple of degrees during the recompose step, your plane of focus is going to move a very very very small amount. If your DoF is also very very very small, well, you might have a problem.

Hold your hand out at arm's length. One finger width will be one degree (roughly, might be half a degree, might be two degrees). If you swing your camera through 5 degrees when you recompose, your plane of focus will push out by about 0.4% of the distance to the subject. If the subject is 10 feet away, the plane of focus will move about half an inch. At 2 degrees, it moves less then 1/10 of an inch.

Try not to be swinging the thing around too wildly, though. At 10 degrees it's shifting almost 2 inches back, and at 20 degrees it's moved 7 inches.

 

[Derrel]

Focus&Recompose is often trotted out as a problem, and usually it's not. If you're swinging in the camera through a couple of degrees during the recompose step, your plane of focus is going to move a very very very small amount. If your DoF is also very very very small, well, you might have a problem.

Hold your hand out at arm's length. One finger width will be one degree (roughly, might be half a degree, might be two degrees). If you swing your camera through 5 degrees when you recompose, your plane of focus will push out by about 0.4% of the distance to the subject. If the subject is 10 feet away, the plane of focus will move about half an inch. At 2 degrees, it moves less then 1/10 of an inch.

Try not to be swinging the thing around too wildly, though. At 10 degrees it's shifting almost 2 inches back, and at 20 degrees it's moved 7 inches.

Have you actually SET UP A CAMERA on a tripod, and aimed it at a wall, and placed three targets on the wall, and using a field of view wide enough to encompass a standing person 3/4 body, actually MEASURED the distances between the center of the frame, and the outer regions of the frame? (In this case the outer regions being the top and bottom zones of the frame, since our person is "standing".)

I think you have not. The difference between the center of the field often is very typically going to be greater than the DOF zone when shooting indoors at anything even remotely resembling "normal" ISO values and "normal" aperture settings. Also, you are assuming a perfectly flat-field lens performance as well, which is not a given.

What the heck is this "couple of degrees" nonsense? Your commentary on this is way out of touch with reality. I appreciate that you're good at math, but you're talking out of your arse here...and dispensing nonsense.

 

[amolitor]

Math dictates how much the DoF moves, dude.

If your point is that you have to swing the camera more than a couple degrees in some shooting scenario, well, then there you are, eh? The point is, my post gives you the tools to estimate how much the plane of focus is going to move. You can estimate a number of degrees of swing by holding your hand out, since I have helpfully told you how many degrees your fingers are, AND I have given you a helpful indication of how much the plane of focus will move for various amounts of swing.

If using the center focus point is going to cause you to have to swing the camera more than, say, the width of your hand held out at arm's length, why then you might consider using alternate means of focusing. Like, another focus point, or focusing on the model's belt buckle, or whatever.

I don't know what the hell you're shooting and I don't care. If you're focusing and then swinging the camera around wildly, well, that's your lookout. Stop doing that, idiot. If you're focusing and making small adjustments to recompose, you'll be fine. And now you know what "small adjustments" are and what "wildly swinging" is.

I'm just happy to help!

 

[amolitor]

And, just for grins, let's try out Derrel's experiment!

85mm lens, shooting at f/2.0 on a FF body, from a distance of 12' from the subject.

Distance to very top or bottom edge of the frame is about 12' 3" and if you focus there you run out of DoF at 11' 11" more or less. So when you swing to center up, your subject is juuuust barely inside the acceptable DoF, by 1 inch. This is a swing of about 12 degrees, you'll find it about two hand widths, more or less, which I think I established is in the range of "uh oh" and constitutes swinging the camera around wildly. Use a more appropriate focusing method, rather than focusing on the subject's eyes with the center focus point, and the recomposing to center her navel in the frame.

 

[hopdaddy]

And, just for grins, let's try out Derrel's experiment!

85mm lens, shooting at f/2.0 on a FF body, from a distance of 12' from the subject.

Distance to very top or bottom edge of the frame is about 12' 3" and if you focus there you run out of DoF at 11' 11" more or less. So when you swing to center up, your subject is juuuust barely inside the acceptable DoF, by 1 inch. This is a swing of about 12 degrees, you'll find it about two hand widths, more or less, which I think I established is in the range of "uh oh" and constitutes swinging the camera around wildly. Use a more appropriate focusing method, rather than focusing on the subject's eyes with the center focus point, and the recomposing to center her navel in the frame.

Well Can we try that with ,say a 35mm lens ....................The op was shooting indoors ,I suspect he was much closer than 12 feet ? No? If that doesn't convince ya ,can we then try it with a 10mm ?

 

[Gavjenks]

Let's guess a typical portrait situation of something like 15 feet away with a 50mm lens, which would cover the girl about that much in frame.
That would mean that he swung about 10 degrees if he focused on the middle of her and then moved her where she is in that photo.
For a 10 degree swing, it would be tan(10 degrees) = 0.23 (ratio of opposite over adjacent)
0.23 * about 2 feet from the center of the image to the center of her body horizontally = 0.46 feet change front to back

I.e., the plane of focus shifts 5 and a half inches. Which is an awful lot. Whether it's enough to seriously soften the girl or not depends on aperture, which I don't know because exif is stripped. But it's extremely plausible.



Or if you want to hypothesize a cramped apartment, then let's switch to about 24mm and 7 feet (doesn't look distorted enough though. I think it's decently far away, but whatever) to get the same framing of the girl.
That would require more angle swing, since 24mm has a wider angle of view. More like 17 degrees.
tan(17 degrees) = 0.31
0.31 * about 2 feet = 0.62 feet change front to back

And at the same aperture, the 24mm + 7 feet distance yields almost exactly the same DOF as the 50mm at 15 feet. So in a cramped apartment, focus and recompose is even more dangerous.

 

[SoulfulRecover]

[h=2]Exif data[/h][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR="class: lookatme"]
[TH="align: left"]Camera[/TH]
[TD]Nikon D300[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: lookatme"]
[TH="align: left"]Exposure[/TH]
[TD]0.04 sec (1/25)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: lookatme"]
[TH="align: left"]Aperture[/TH]
[TD]f/3.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: lookatme"]
[TH="align: left"]Focal Length[/TH]
[TD]35 mm[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]ISO Speed[/TH]
[TD]640[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Exposure Bias[/TH]
[TD]0 EV[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Flash[/TH]
[TD]No Flash[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]X-Resolution[/TH]
[TD]300 dpi[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Y-Resolution[/TH]
[TD]300 dpi[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Software[/TH]
[TD]Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Date and Time (Modified)[/TH]
[TD]2013:10:04 19:21:08[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Exposure Program[/TH]
[TD]Manual[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Date and Time (Original)[/TH]
[TD]2013:10:04 18:39:06[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Date and Time (Digitized)[/TH]
[TD]2013:10:04 18:39:06[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Max Aperture Value[/TH]
[TD]1.7[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Metering Mode[/TH]
[TD]Multi-segment[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Light Source[/TH]
[TD]Cloudy[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Sub Sec Time Original[/TH]
[TD]77[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Sub Sec Time Digitized[/TH]
[TD]77[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Sensing Method[/TH]
[TD]One-chip color area[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]CFAPattern[/TH]
[TD][Red,Green][Green,Blue][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Custom Rendered[/TH]
[TD]Normal[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Exposure Mode[/TH]
[TD]Manual[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]White Balance[/TH]
[TD]Manual[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Digital Zoom Ratio[/TH]
[TD]1[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Focal Length (35mm format)[/TH]
[TD]52 mm[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Scene Capture Type[/TH]
[TD]Standard[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Gain Control[/TH]
[TD]Low gain up[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Contrast[/TH]
[TD]Normal[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Saturation[/TH]
[TD]Normal[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Sharpness[/TH]
[TD]Normal[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Subject Distance Range[/TH]
[TD]Unknown[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Lens Info[/TH]
[TD]35mm f/1.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Lens Model[/TH]
[TD]35.0 mm f/1.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Compression[/TH]
[TD]JPEG (old-style)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Coded Character Set[/TH]
[TD]UTF8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Date Created[/TH]
[TD]2013:10:04[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Time Created[/TH]
[TD]18:39:06[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Digital Creation Date[/TH]
[TD]2013:10:04[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Digital Creation Time[/TH]
[TD]18:39:06[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Viewing Conditions Illuminant Type[/TH]
[TD]D50[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Measurement Observer[/TH]
[TD]CIE 1931[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Measurement Flare[/TH]
[TD]0.999%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Measurement Illuminant[/TH]
[TD]D65[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]XMPToolkit[/TH]
[TD]Adobe XMP Core 5.5-c002 1.148022, 2012/07/15-18:06:45[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Creator Tool[/TH]
[TD]Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Metadata Date[/TH]
[TD]2013:10:04 19:21:08-05:00[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Lens[/TH]
[TD]35.0 mm f/1.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Lens ID[/TH]
[TD]159[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Image Number[/TH]
[TD]65457[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Approximate Focus Distance[/TH]
[TD]2.51[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Original Document ID[/TH]
[TD]50CF5F55DCF5BA3B24B2798F5AD103F1[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]History Action[/TH]
[TD]derived[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]History Parameters[/TH]
[TD]converted from image/x-nikon-nef to image/dng, saved to new location[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]History Instance ID[/TH]
[TD]xmp.iid:d66c7d90-f86e-4b40-9690-41df3593517d[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]History When[/TH]
[TD]2013:10:04 18:55-05:00[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]History Software Agent[/TH]
[TD]Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]History Changed[/TH]
[TD]/[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Derived From Original Document ID[/TH]
[TD]50CF5F55DCF5BA3B24B2798F5AD103F1[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Format[/TH]
[TD]image/jpeg[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="align: left"]Color Transform[/TH]
[TD]YCbCr[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


My guess is that the focus caught her shoulder rather than her face and I just went with it not paying attention or thinking the DoF was deep enough it caught her face too. That in combination of shooting 1/25th hand held with my movement and hers im sure it tossed the focus all over the place. Typically ill have the subject move, focus then click. everytime. I dont think Ive ever focused, had the subject move and just click especially in a low light, wide open setting.

 

[amolitor]

Yeah, like I said, don't be waving the camera around wildly.

 

[SoulfulRecover]

for sure. I need to invest in a decent tri-pod. I picked one up from best buy for 30 bucks just to get the last shot for this project but its so cheap, it wiggles around like crazy even with everything locked in place. such a waste of money.