NSFW Portrait for class

[DanOstergren25]

The constant "I'm right and you're an ******* who's talking out of your ass for disagreeing with me" contest that always goes on in this forum is becoming highly uninspiring.

 

[amolitor]

What's especially odd is that Derrel and I get along really well.

 

[Geaux]

I actually like the second shot than the first one IMO. beautiful girlfriend nonetheless.

what I find funny is that whenever there is a disagreement or someone thinking there way is better it nearly always involves Derrel or Gavjenks or both....

I actually like Derrel and his input most of the time. He just goes on these "I'm always right..I studied art and photography and you suck" tangents and it's rather off putting.

 

[Derrel]

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 ?

Amolitor...the OP has a crop-frame Nikon. My experiment was done with a Canon 20D at 10 feet, using a 33mm focal length setting...the difference betweeen the center of the frame and the edges was in excess of the depth of field at f/8. Sorry dude...

Look at Gavjenk's reasoning in his reply to your left-field "85mm lens on full frame from 12 feet" thing... interestingly, Gavjenks' theoretical calulations and my actual experiment measurements are in relatively close agreement...huh, imagine that. Unless maybe my Stanley steel tape was kidnapped by aliens and mis-calibrated...

As Gavjenks wrote, "So in a cramped apartment, focus and recompose is even more dangerous."

Uh, yeah...that was my point.

 

[amolitor]

What the hell are you on about? We don't even disagree.

 

[Derrel]

What the hell are you on about? We don't even disagree.

Whatever you say. Go ahead. Dismiss it.

"Just for grins." Yeah. ****s and giggles too.

 

[DiskoJoe]

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.

You dont need a really bad ass tripod for most stuff, just a heavy one. I got a sunpak from best buy. I just bought the one that was the heaviest. Hasnt failed me yet.

 

[Geaux]

Or you can get a sandbag or hang your camera bag under the center post if you feel it needs a bit more weight.

 

[SoulfulRecover]

I don't even think its a weight issue. One of the legs doesn't seem like it was assembled as "tight" as the others so it's got some wobble to it. Like it pivots on it self. I got my other tripod back that a friend borrowed and it's much more stable so it shouldn't be an issue now

 

[Starskream666]

I think the white sheet is a good idea. Also the right arm does look awkward, IMO maybe both hands up like behind her head pose would be sexier

 

[DanOstergren25]

what I find funny is that whenever there is a disagreement or someone thinking there way is better it nearly always involves Derrel or Gavjenks or both....

I actually like Derrel and his input most of the time. He just goes on these "I'm always right..I studied art and photography and you suck" tangents and it's rather off putting.

I agree, it really is off putting. I think it's best to just let them have their opinion without questioning it or defending your own reasoning for something, or feel the wrath of hell fire until you say they are right.

 

[hopdaddy]

what I find funny is that whenever there is a disagreement or someone thinking there way is better it nearly always involves Derrel or Gavjenks or both....

I actually like Derrel and his input most of the time. He just goes on these "I'm always right..I studied art and photography and you suck" tangents and it's rather off putting.

I agree, it really is off putting. I think it's best to just let them have their opinion without questioning it or defending your own reasoning for something, or feel the wrath of hell fire until you say they are right.

One of the down falls of the internet , In MY opinion , is the abundant misinformation .I know from practical experience that "Focus and recompose" will cause softness . The degree depends on the lens . I feel one thing that shows the quality of a photographer ,is there ability to achieve "Critical Focus " . I was simply trying to help the OP . Derrel and Gavjenks ,Again In My Opinion " Were simply Trying to point the OP in the correct direction .And FWIW, A tripod is not needed for portraits.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

Not trying to defend derrel. I must say after meeting him in person, I actually understand the way he writes stuff better. The way he writes is exactly how he talks/jokes in real life. And when he jokes, it does sound very arrogant when it is written down. You have to hear him talk to take no offense.. seriously.

That's probably why you don't see me fight with derrel anymore.