DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> How shallow are your DOF scores?
Pages:  
Showing posts 201 - 225 of 283, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/01/2007 12:53:11 PM · #201
I have to agree with Soup on this one. If the shot isn't sharp from front to back there is shallow DOF. How shallow is a seperate issue.
02/01/2007 01:02:15 PM · #202
Originally posted by magenmarie:

Holding at a 5.35. This was up from a 4.8ish yesterday. YAY!


whooop. Just jumped up to a 5.36!!! WHEEEEEEEEE!
02/01/2007 01:05:28 PM · #203
Originally posted by krafty1:

I have to agree with Soup on this one. If the shot isn't sharp from front to back there is shallow DOF. How shallow is a seperate issue.


Ditto, although that deer image isn't the best example. Clouds are kinda' fuzzy to begin with.
02/01/2007 01:12:56 PM · #204
Votes: 92
Views: 124
Avg Vote: 5.7065
Comments: 3
Favorites: 1

Hey! I got a favorite!
02/01/2007 01:13:38 PM · #205
I think there are misnomers on not only distance -- i.e. a nearby subject and distant background create a shallow DOF shot -- but also things like f-stop ... it's doesn't have to be f/2.8 for shallow DOF! In fact, my entry is f/5.6 and I contemplated going another stop down; at f/2.8 a mere sliver of my subject would have been in focus.

This is f/9.0 and was not shot with a macro lens!

' . substr('//www.pbase.com/robotography/image/65051004/small.jpg', strrpos('//www.pbase.com/robotography/image/65051004/small.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

And this is at f/7.1, representing both points (distant background and narrower aperture).

' . substr('//www.pbase.com/robotography/image/62462099/small.jpg', strrpos('//www.pbase.com/robotography/image/62462099/small.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

I think ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' krafty1 hit the nail on the head: "how shallow is a separate issue."
02/01/2007 01:13:55 PM · #206
Bokeh is a direct result of a shallow depth of field. Whether or not you shot with a 50mm lens at f1.8 and focused on your subject 3 feet away and the background is out of focus, or shot a subject 50 feet away with a 300mm lens at f5.6 and it's background is out of focus. Your still dealing with a shallow depth of field. Your dealing with a subject to background relationship. Shallow depth of field is not focal length specific. I do remember this from my camera and lighting class. It's one of the basic rules in photography.
02/01/2007 01:51:40 PM · #207
Votes: 94
Views: 119
Avg Vote: 5.6277
I am totally disapointed, I really thought I had this one.
02/01/2007 02:36:40 PM · #208
yeah i know i was lazy and didn't feel like looking to hard for an example. no - wait it was because i am at work and didn't want to waste any time. no, i was just being lazy at work and here...

Originally posted by scalvert:

Ditto, although that deer image isn't the best example. Clouds are kinda' fuzzy to begin with.


well - it sort of is. a longer focal length will give you shallower DOF with all else being equal ( same aperture and distance from lens to subject - shutter speed doesn't matter ). but the longer lens would also need a longer exposure. so you have

1 - distance to subject
2 - aperture
3 - focal length of lens

the focal length becomes unimportant only if you are going to frame the subject exactly the same in the viewfinder with the two different lenses. that would give you equal DOF from both lenses.

Originally posted by jtlee321:

Shallow depth of field is not focal length specific.

02/01/2007 03:44:10 PM · #209
funny, none of the 8 comments mentions the "shallow dof"...

what would that mean? :P
02/01/2007 05:11:31 PM · #210
I guess the voters discovered which one was mine. It was going good at 6.3x, but has steadily gone down. It's now at 5.9x. I swear itís a conspiracy against me.

On the plus side, all 4 of my comments seem to like it.
02/01/2007 05:47:15 PM · #211
Comments, You got comments.....I wish
02/01/2007 07:31:12 PM · #212
Krafty1 said it and i agree "how shallow is a separate issue."

Votes: 105
Views: 137
Avg Vote: 5.9143
Comments: 4

Ive been teetering between 5.8 and 5.9 the whole time. Should start leveling out soon...
02/01/2007 07:37:11 PM · #213
I would like some comments too! I only received 2 (but I will definitely keep them because they are good). I love comments because that is the only way I can grow in my skill. I am afraid to leave comments though because I am not skilled enough yet to actually give critique. I was hoping to read some comments on mine to learn how you give constructive comments.

I am having a lot of fun though!
02/01/2007 07:54:00 PM · #214
Slow slogging...

You have rated 40 of 412 images (10%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 40 of 412 images (10%) in this challenge.
02/01/2007 08:04:47 PM · #215
Originally posted by WriteHeart:

I am afraid to leave comments though because I am not skilled enough yet to actually give critique.


You only have to be skilled enough to say what you like (or don't like) about the photo. No Master's degree required.
02/01/2007 08:06:07 PM · #216
<-- not visited by Colette yet ... waiting for my "I am humbled by this exceptional photo, wish I could vote higher than 10" comment.
02/01/2007 08:22:07 PM · #217
Well, I submitted my original to have it validated because I am getting comments to the effect that my photo couldn't be done in basic editing. So, I figure for every commenter, there are probably a few more that think that who did not comment.

My score is quite a bit lower than I expected, but hey, I am biased:)
02/01/2007 09:20:39 PM · #218
thanks for everyone's opinions ... i think that soup is right, in that as long as there's blur (bokeh), it's shallow dof. but i still think that in the spirit of a shallow dof challenge, they're asking for MORE shallow dof.

soup's example shot, if it were in the shallow dof challenge, i'd give it less than 5 because i don't think it fits the concept and spirit of the challenge.

as a few people have said 'how shallow is a separate issue' ... and i think that's the point of the challenge!

:o)
02/01/2007 09:37:37 PM · #219
If razor-thin DOF is what the intention of the challenge was then the challenge should have been named such. In my opinion, especially with the wording of the challenge description, one should take a liberal view of the challenge rather than create an unstated criterion by which to judge.

That is, however, only my opinion. To each his own.

Try defining "spirit of a shallow DOF challenge". To some this would mean a striking separation from the background such that only the foreground subject is perfectly in focus. To others this means focusing on the 2mm section of one petal of a flower with the rest blurred.

Who is right? Both are.

That is why I take the liberal view. I can evaluate both for the intended effect and the execution of it.

Message edited by author 2007-02-01 21:38:55.
02/01/2007 09:48:23 PM · #220
Originally posted by krafty1:

Who is right? Both are.

That is why I take the liberal view. I can evaluate both for the intended effect and the execution of it.


i think that's a fair point. there's not going to be a consensus. :o)

i actually haven't started doing my votes yet, because i didn't decide how shallow i think the dof should be ... which is why i've been discussing it here.

i think i'm ready to start voting! :) so don't be blaming bad scores on me just yet! LOL
02/01/2007 10:01:16 PM · #221
Originally posted by super-dave:

i think i'm ready to start voting! :) so don't be blaming bad scores on me just yet! LOL


Oh please be nice. I am currently looking at a personal best!
02/01/2007 10:19:58 PM · #222
Help a guy out.. one or two tens would bump me over the 5.5 threshold. ;)
02/02/2007 11:47:28 AM · #223
It looks like the voting is a bit more favorable today. I hope it lasts.
02/02/2007 11:51:35 AM · #224
Only 3 comments so far. I haven't seen a number that low in almost a year (although admittedly I'm part of the problem).
02/02/2007 01:02:20 PM · #225
So, I think there may be some voter fatigue going on.. I've had only a few votes for this challenge in the last 24 hours. And, much to my chagrin, it's going down.

votes = 111
views = 152
avg = 5.273 :-(

Only 5 comments & so far & they're very fair & spot on. I appreciate the constructive criticism.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 05/30/2020 12:05:44 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 05/30/2020 12:05:44 PM EDT.