Shallow depth of field

[pj1974]

Hello all

Well, after yesterday's success with some macro work, here is another shot from this weekend. The photo below dipicts a flower on a bush I just "discovered" tucked away in a corner of my garden, under a tree which is half tree / half "poison ivy".

That particularly bush must have come out with flowers over the last few weeks, while I was away, and when I looked closer (just this weekend), I discovered several lovely blossoms out in force. Here is one from that bush I particularly liked.

Note that I had to set the aperture at a fairly high f-stop setting (f9) just to get the bloom in focus, while the background is still blurred (see the leaves around it, blurred in the background). This shows macro work with a DSLR does NOT require large apertures (e.g. one doesn't need to have aperture of f 2.8 for example to achieve shallow depth of field if working at small ranges, like in flower photography).

Thanks for looking...

Paul

[pj1974]

And this 2nd flower was a photo I actually took quite a while ago (over 7 years ago) in Tasmania on a bushwalk in a very remote part of Tasmania's World Heritage "Cradle Mountain / Lake St Clair" National Park.

I hope it still qualifies for this challenge. (?) I made that photo with my trusty Fuji point and shoot digital camera.

We (being my uncle, a friend and myself) slept in the old bush hut in the background. There were some beautiful small wildflowers out in the field. The photo brings back many memories of that walk.... !

Happy viewing.

Paul

[calr]

I like the second shot the most. The sharpness of the flower against the blurred but still recognizable background yields an outstanding composition.

There have been some complaints about the number of archive shots used in this forum. Consequently, we are starting to discourage the practice and encourage people to go out and shoot new photos for the challenge. After all, that's what this forum is about...to go out and try new techniques.

I have been as guilty as the next person for using archives. I have over 22,000 images on my hard drive with an excellent management program (Imatch) so it is extremely easy for me to find an image for just about any challenge.

Even though your second image is seven years old, I'll accept it and keep it online. Now can you show us some current images as good as that one?

Cal

[pj1974]

H Cal

Thanks for your comments and reitterating about the purpose of this challenge. I appreciate that yes, the photos posted should not be archive. Most of my posts are specifically made for this challenge. For example the 2 photos in http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=85 and also the two shots in http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=85 are new / specifically made photos.

Thanks for your kindness to keep my 1 archived shot online. I am glad you like that photo. It is a special one... and I must try hard to match it!

You only have 22,000 images!? (ok, just kidding). That is quite a few!!! I have not counted lately, but at last count (about 2 years ago) I had about 70,000... most taken with my 3 trusty Fuji point and shoot cameras at that stage, but now I had probably an extra 30,000 with my Canon DSLR.... I must do a count agani sometime.

Looking forward to more new photos from us al!

Paul

[Trojansoc]

Really nicely done, Paul. I like the first one because of the way you controlled the DOF throughout the bloom.

Paul

[bhammitt]

Excellent work on both Paul!

Bob

[nhmom]

Very nice on both, Paul. I like how you didn't totally blur the background to unrecongizable.

Patty

[pj1974]

Hi Paul

Thank you for your comments. In fact it was quite a challenge to get just the right amount of DOF for the bloom... I'm glad you appreciate the work and thought that went into it!

---------

Cheers Bob

Many thanks for looking and for commenting. Good to have your feedback.

-------------

Hello Patty

I'm not sure if your comments refer to first, second or both. But thanks anyway! I must admit in both photos I did want to have some of the background still "recognizable" (especially with the 2nd photo). The first photo, I wanted to have pretty much all the bloom in focus, but the leaves (quite close by) PARTLY in focus, and the dark background (basically the ground) blurred. It worked!

Thanks again all....

Paul