# Homework ,DOF Comparison



## dicklaxt (Jun 2, 2005)

70-300mm set at 70mm,subject 13 feet away,full afternoon sunshine,cropped only

f22 and 1/30,got a little wiggle in this one

f4.5 and 1/400

Heres another f22 and 1/30 without the wiggle


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

Dick, keep experimenting and you will know your camera/lens well. 

I find that very high contrast subjects are often difficult to deal with. Many of the best shots taken are taken during the "golden hours" of an hour before sunset, and an hour after sunrise. 

However, I am getting too old and lazy to enjoy the early times very often.... Ha Ha rich


----------



## fishingnotcatching (May 30, 2007)

Here's a pretty in depth article on DOF. 
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/articles/IntroToDoF.pdf

I've recently started to try to shoot more things at a hyperfocal distance, which, now that I'm starting to understand how to do it, is another nifty tool to have, especially with landscapes.


----------



## samurai_ag (Mar 31, 2008)

one note to try to go by with shutter speed that will help you get a crisp shot is that most hands can only hold 1/90th and faster ....some with more steady hands can hold as low as 1/60th....most of the time it is best to use a tripod any time it is possible...


----------



## The Machine (Jun 4, 2007)

nice colors


----------



## grayfish (Jul 31, 2005)

I was not going to make any comments since you did not ask but I feel it necessary in this case. Since the images are overexposed and out of focus or blurred due to camera shake I took a look at the EXIF information to see if it would tell me anything. I see that you have you camera's exposure compensation set at +2.00 EV which I feel is causing the overexposure. I would suggest you set it to 0.00 to start with. I am sure it was done by mistake since you were having problems with the on/off control. I think you may have gone into an optional mode and moved the EV control to the right of the switch. Since you are using Aperture Priority, the +2.00 EV is, in effect decreases shutter speed two stops, causing the overexposures.

You also have the ISO in the first and last image at 800. The ambient lighting appears to be bright enough to use a far lower setting, even less than the ISO 400 you used in the second shot.



And a third observation; if you are experimenting, change only one setting type over several shots to see the results. It is the only way to actually see what effect the setting has. Leave everything the same except the Aperture in this case, since you were looking at DOF. Since you are in AP mode the shutter speed will compensate for lighting on its own. The higher numbered aperture settings the lower the shutter speed at the same ambient light. A good thing in most cases.



One further note; I am not a photographer, so take this for what it is, my opinion.


----------



## Koru (Sep 25, 2006)

ditto what grayfish said. it was way easier for me to learn one setting at a time. try not to bother with cropping anything for a little while until you can see easily what the changes to your setting will do. it takes a little bit of practice (or in my case a jolly Lot! lol ).

i don't know how much you know about over exposure... over exposure tends to show i 'blown out' portions of an image. there is a total loss of detail and the over exposed area shows as a white.

under exposure shows as black, also with a total loss of detail. 

now there are variations between and yes you can alter the exposure levels depending on the effect you want to show in your image. sometimes i'll take my exposure level down a notch or two to give a gloomy mood to the photo. sometimes if i'm shooting in shadows, i might choose +0.3 or +0.7. when i choose those, i have to hold the camera very very still (a tripod is preferred) because the shutter is open for longer to let in a little more light. the longer the shutter is open, the more camera shake will occur and the more blurry your image will be.

so, with these photos you've posted here, don't panic that they're all going to be blurred. just reset your exposure as grayfish indicated to 0.0 and take the exact same images again to see the difference.

by the way, those roses sure look beautiful and healthy. i can't wait to see them again. 

rosesm


----------



## fishingnotcatching (May 30, 2007)

Koru said:


> by the way, those roses sure look beautiful and healthy. i can't wait to see them again.
> 
> rosesm


LOL I think they're silk flowers!!!!


----------



## Koru (Sep 25, 2006)

fishingnotcatching said:


> LOL I think they're silk flowers!!!!


by jove i think you're right 

i'll blame the fact i'm still getting used to these glasses 

well heck, i want to see them again anyway.


rosesm


----------



## dicklaxt (Jun 2, 2005)

Thanks all for the comments,,,,,,,,,I don't have the foggiest what you are talking about but I will find out. Yes,right on with the silks and cropping them was the only way I knew to get them small enogh for the forum to accept.

Okay ,yes it is at +2 and doesn't want to change following the directions to do so,by depressing the shutter button half way and turning the quick control dial **** frustrating where's my hammer.

dick


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

Ahhhh haaa... they were cropped a lot! 
That explains some of the the blurriness.

There are many different simple programs that we use to re-size AND/OR post the shots here. 

If you are posting directly ...using the 2cool site to "host" your pictures...then you have to resize (not crop ) to get them on here. 

If you are doing "remote hosting" (most of us do it that way)....on someplace like.... Flickr; Photobucket; etc. then each of those places have a way of LINKING to a smaller image....so no cropping is necessary. 

Where do you "keep" your photos that you post here? On your own computer..and then directly to the 2cool site????...or on Photobucket or one of the other "remote hosts" ? Rich


----------



## dicklaxt (Jun 2, 2005)

rich,they are on photo bucket.

dick


----------



## dicklaxt (Jun 2, 2005)

Well kiss my Petunia,who said you had to have a media card in the camera to make that adjustment,okay got it set to Zero.

Grayfish how did you access those settings from just a posted picture?

dick


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

OK I use Flickr so I don't know the exact options at Photobucket...but some of the posters here do use PB so they can help if you can't find an answer easily enough. 

On Flickr; I post a bunch of shots...I click on one of them...it gives me a number of options, one of which is "all sizes". When I click on "all sizes" ... I can then choose one of five different sizes ranging from a "thumbnail" all of the way up to the original, full size..which for my 14 mgp camera..might be 5 or 7 mgp! 

I normally choose the middle one or one just slightly above that one. After I click on my choice...I get a smaller picture to work with. I copy the URL of where that particular sized picture is...and THAT URL is what I copy into the box when I make my post. 

This explanation takes a lot longer to type than it does to do. Mess around with it for a while and post something..anything... in different sizes to see if it works for you. regards, Rich


----------



## dicklaxt (Jun 2, 2005)

One of the same pics with out cropping,are comments the same?

dick


----------



## fishingnotcatching (May 30, 2007)

There is EXIF information written to eachj photo file with all sorts of infor like camera model, iso, aperature, shutter speed, Flash exposure compensation (and whether or not it fired) Exposure compensations, date, time, aprroximate lattitude and longitude....

Just kidding on those last two. 

when not cropped, the overexposure is less apparent, since the original crop just happened to be a highlight of the original frame. Your camera (unless you have changed the settings from factory) will meter for a large portion of the frame and will attempt to create the "best" exposure based on all elements of the frame. This may result is blown highlights, or lost shadows. in anycase, part of the lovelyness of learning to use these things (DSLR's) is to figure out when the camera's attempt at the "best" exposure is going to screw up, and THEN use the exposure compensation to correct it, or shoot manual. 

In anycase, with your test pic, always use a tripod and mirror lockup with a time delay shutter or a shutter cable ($5 bucks on ebay) when making any test shots. Your results will be less useful w/o it. Also, avoid direct sunlight. Very high contrast scenes are the weakness of digital cameras.


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

Keep shooting Keep posting Rich


----------



## grayfish (Jul 31, 2005)

dicklaxt said:


> Well kiss my Petunia,who said you had to have a media card in the camera to make that adjustment,okay got it set to Zero.
> 
> Grayfish how did you access those settings from just a posted picture?
> 
> dick


Dick,

There are many ways to view EXIF information. One I use most of the time is Opanda IEXIF2. It is a free free version of Opanda Pro. Once istalled you simply right click on the image in the browser window and select "View Exif/GPS/IPTC with IExif"

Download Opanda Here.

As far as linking to images on Photobucket, if you will change the settings on Photobucket to reduce the image to 800 x 600 or higher when you upload the image. don't worry so much about resizing at your end. Photobucket will reduce the image for you. Be aware the it only reduces, so that if you reize at your compurter to a smaller size, Photobucket will leave it at that size.

I leave mine at 1 megabyte. See image for opition location.










The uncropped image you posted is much to small to comment on. At least for my eyes. It still appears to be overexposed in some areas. The apparent distance you are shooting from and the distance from the subject to the fence is goning to make it difficult to judge any DOF difference unless you take an image focused on the closest flower at every F-stop.


----------



## sandybottom (Jun 1, 2005)

Heck, Dick there's many people here to teach us newbies. Darn it, I'm still posting blurry pictures. Just keep shooting. I enjoy the teachings here.


----------



## grayfish (Jul 31, 2005)

Rich and Sandy are correct. Just kieep shooting Dick. It can and will be frustrating. Just be glad you are using digital images and not having to delvelop and print film. High dollar cost for practice on both ends compared to digital images. And the time lag was a killer.


----------



## Koru (Sep 25, 2006)

dicklaxt said:


> Thanks all for the comments,,,,,,,,,I don't have the foggiest what you are talking about but I will find out. Yes,right on with the silks and cropping them was the only way I knew to get them small enogh for the forum to accept.
> 
> Okay ,yes it is at +2 and doesn't want to change following the directions to do so,by depressing the shutter button half way and turning the quick control dial **** frustrating where's my hammer.
> 
> dick


now now now, if you hit your thumb with the hammer it will hurt and you won't be able to hold the camera properly. 

one step at a time. there's no rush. understand the journey can be enjoyable - it is your choice to make it so. 

rosesm


----------

