cc please: 14 year old Springer

[Gina]

Hi everyone,

I'd like a bit of feedback on this please. I would have liked a bit more focus on the eyes not the nose and mouth but my poor old boy just kept moving. I'm learning about shallow DOF and am quite pleased how this turned out. There is a very slight texture added too x

[Ian]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

Yes, I definitely think the eyes should be in focus. It's often very tricky!

There seem to be a lot of spots on the lower left of the frame?

Ian

[Gina]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

Thanks Ian, yes I know about the spots, it's part of the texture. Shallow depth of field is certainly challenging.

[Pops]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

The white fur is a blown out in places as well which has flattened out the fur texture.
I would have thought that the head is to large for such a wide aperture as f2. If you got the eyes you would lose the nose.
The muzzle strap doesn't look good for a dog portrait although I do appreciate that there may be a special need for it.
JMO of course

[Gina]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

The white fur is a blown out in places as well which has flattened out the fur texture.
I would have thought that the head is to large for such a wide aperture as f2. If you got the eyes you would lose the nose.
The muzzle strap doesn't look good for a dog portrait although I do appreciate that there may be a special need for it.
JMO of course

Thanks pops

There was no apparent blown whites showing in the histogram so I don't understand that.

This exercise was to learn about working with shallow DOF so the reason for asking for cc was to get advice about that in particular and to see how far I can push the capabilities of my camera and my abilities.

Finally, this is not a muzzle strap it's a Halti - a bit like a Halter for horses. It helps with dogs that pull on the lead - Charlie doesn't walk well or far as he's 14 and has arthritis but he's always worn this since puppyhood and as he doesn't wear a collar there is no way to get hold of him if he wanders off.

[OlyPaul]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

Hi Gina the exif info says it all.

Focus: At 2.1m, with a depth of field of about 15mm, centered on the focus point.

If your none metric that's about just a fraction over half a inch of the image that is in focus. Way to shallower dof for a dog portrait, even if the focus had been on the nearest eye then the far one would still have been out of focus.

[Pops]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

this is not a muzzle strap it's a Halti

Thanks for that info Gina. I'm not familiar with those.
Didin't realize he was that old either. He looks very healthy despite the arthrits.

[Gina]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

Hi Gina the exif info says it all.

Focus: At 2.1m, with a depth of field of about 15mm, centered on the focus point.

If your none metric that's about just a fraction over half a inch of the image that is in focus. Way to shallower dof for a dog portrait, even if the focus had been on the nearest eye then the far one would still have been out of focus.

Thank you OlyPaul - have you got any advice or help with honing my skills on this particular subject (using shallow DOF). I want to get the very best out of my two prime lenses and am searching for help everywhere. Much appreciating all the feedback. Time and time again I return to DPN for this kind of help - I see you all as my mentors and teachers.

[Pops]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

Subject distance from the background is relevant.
e.g if you positioned Charlie with a wall/fence for a background the more distance you have between Charie and the wall/fence the better your dof will be.

[Gina]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

My goal is to get the subject (usually children & babies) in focus with a creamy bokeh background - that's what I set out to achieve here.

Here are two other examples but with different settings but the distance between the background and the subject is the same so how does it make any difference having the subject closer to a background - surely that can't be correct? Now you got me all confused pops?

[Jocelyn Walker]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

I find when I get the eyes & nose in focus, parts of the body are out of focus or soft!

[OlyPaul]

Re: cc please: 14 year old Springer

Subject distance from the background is relevant.
e.g if you positioned Charlie with a wall/fence for a background the more distance you have between Charie and the wall/fence the better your dof will be.

Here are two other examples but with different settings but the distance between the background and the subject is the same so how does it make any difference having the subject closer to a background - surely that can't be correct? Now you got me all confused pops?

I think what Pops means is that the further away the background is from the subject the more it will be out of focus, the dof remains the same for a given aperture.