Photographers - these Royal Lytham photos - How is the depth of field manipulated?

[nevets88]

The first photo in the gallery below - if you ever seen the scene in "The Social Network" where the depth of field was manipulated to make everything look super sharp - the crew race in England - is that done in the photo? It looks like a combination of HDR, DoF manipulation or some kind of specialized filter.

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2012/7/17/and-yet-more-observations-from-rainy-lytham.html

[iacas]

DoF is simply a matter of the aperture. Lower f-numbers = shallower depth of field. Landscape photographers almost never shoot below f/8, for example.

I think Geoff also added some effects and stylization.

[DarkPrince]

A lot of this just looks like typical instagram tilt/focus filters or w/e they are where like a perfect circle is in focus but everything else is blurry. As Iacas said DoF is purely the effect of the size of the aperture used during the exposure.

As an example, here are 2 shots I took with my 55mm F1.4 prime lens. F 1.4 is an extremely large aperture and I think 1.2 is generally the largest you can get commercially, but at this aperture, the Depth of Field is so small at close ranges I can describe it as the size of a nickel or quarter. If it's not on the EXACT focal plane, it won't show up in focus. IN both of these, only the very center of the images is in focus and you can barely read that it says "Arcane" below one and "Joker" above the other.

This is the opposite of say this one which I took at F4.0

Or this which I took taken at F7.1

Lastly, this was a sunrise taken over a lake with fog coming off of it, shot at F14.0
(apologies if this shows up really big, not sure if it will automatically resize)

( For a larger panoramic click HERE )

But essentially the "larger" the F number, the smaller the aperture (less light is entering the lens) and the more "appears" to be in focus both in front of or behind the primary focal point/plane. Smaller F numbers are great for portraits because you can keep the subject in focus (face) and the background can be purposely blurred by shooting at say F2.0 or smaller.

[Jimbo Slice]

Originally Posted by iacas

DoF is simply a matter of the aperture. Lower f-numbers = shallower depth of field. Landscape photographers almost never shoot below f/8, for example.

I think Geoff also added some effects and stylization.

Indeed, I see some after affect on some of the shots.

I have a portrait lens with an f-stop low as 1.8

I took a nice photo of my clubs at f/1.8

The front and back are blurry and the middle of the shot is very sharp.

[pixel5]

What he is referring to is called "tilt-shift".

Google it.

[Jimbo Slice]

Originally Posted by pixel5

What he is referring to is called "tilt-shift".

Google it.

Ah yes I think you may be right. Is that done with the camera or post processing?

[zeg]

Originally Posted by Jimbo Slice

Ah yes I think you may be right. Is that done with the camera or post processing?

It's best done with the camera. You use a tilt-shift lens, which can shift the lens relative to the camera and adjust the focal plane of the lens not to be parallel with the film (CCD) plane. It can be done to some degree in post-processing, as well.

[DarkPrince]

A relatively affordable way to do it with a camera is a LensBaby, they make a few different kinds with different effects but I think they are all tilt-shift (which is what I meant when I said tilt/focus...had a brain fart -.-)  The cheapest way, instagram which I'm pretty sure all of those photos were taken with or are from.

[Beachcomber]

DarkPrince, those are some great photos.  Thanks for sharing.

[DarkPrince]

Originally Posted by Beachcomber

DarkPrince, those are some great photos.  Thanks for sharing.

Thanks, I've recently begun to look into getting some prints made of some and selling them in the area but I'm still trying to wrap my head around the logistics and overhead when it comes to pricing since I don't think they are super amazing and feel weird charging $20-30 a piece depending on size/quality of the paper + the cost of gas driving to the photo lab 45 minutes away lol. Thanks again for the compliment. I'm currently revamping my photobucket but I've always got random stuff up there.