Aperture and Focal Points — F-Stop Friday

When Lauren and I were in Stillwater on Sunday, we took some pictures down by the St. Croix River. (The body of water that serves as the border between Minnesota and Wisconsin.)

I almost always shoot at f/3.2 or wider. No particular reason, I just do. I’m actually trying to not do this as much, as not every image needs a creamy, blurry background. Since it was a sunny day, I had to keep my ISO low (100) and my shutter speed pretty fast so that all my images wouldn’t be blown out.

This one was shot at f/2.8 using my 50mm 1.4:

LRedit-3950

I like it because, while the background is blurry, you can still get a sense of the scene. (That I’m beside a river, and there’s a boat in the background and people walking along the river.) But you can’t see a lot of detail. And maybe I want to show exactly where I am, without changing the composition of my image.

There are two ways to do this. The first is by simply changing where I set my focal point. So for fun, I switched my focal point from the far left (bottom in this case since the shots are vertical) to far right (top):

LRedit-3951

In this image, my f-stop was actually f/1.8, but because what I’ve set my focal point on is so far away from me, more of the scene is in focus.

Depth of field is fairly mathematical. As in, you can find charts and graphs about where to set your aperture depending on how far you are from your subject. And to be honest I don’t understand all the math about it, but there are more variables than just your aperture. Your distance from the subject and on what part of the scene you’re focusing (and the rest of the exposure triangle — shutter speed and ISO) also all come into play. Math!

For a really clear example of how DOF can really change an image, I shot two exposures back to back, first wide open at f/1.4 and then with a much narrower aperture of f/11.

dof_example

Quite a difference, right? I actually prefer the image with the narrower aperture (f/11), as you get a real sense of what it was like that day by the river. (In a VAN down by the RIVER. This is a required quote when you’re down by a river. RIP Chris Farley.)

So get out there and change up your aperture and play with manually setting your focal points (read your manual if you don’t know how!) and see what you can do!

 

Flare Fun — F Stop Fridays

Ah, shooting into the sun. How I love you. (Eller? He’s pretty indifferent about the whole thing.)

Eller is Golden

And flare! Hello! I love you even more.

Tired of Me

It used to be that I could only get flare when I didn’t mean to, till I noticed a few commonalities (and practiced practiced practiced).

For starters, you need to shoot toward the sun. (The obvious first step.)

Second, it helps if the sun is close to the horizon. (Early morning and late afternoon/early evening are ideal.) Third — and this one is a trick that goes against what you’d think — is to shoot with a narrow aperture (so a larger f stop number). When you shoot wide open (for example the lens I used here opens to f/1.4) you let in too much light. And instead of getting flare, you get just blow everything out.

In these shots I stopped up a bit — to 2.8 or 3.2 — so that I wasn’t letting in as much light. But depending on your subject, where the sun is etc., you could even stop up even more. Just play.

Scout's Ready for a Yard Too

The next stop in getting really warm, delicious light flare photos come with your post processing.

This image below, for instance, is straight out of camera.

IMG_3102

To get it where I wanted it, I first adjusted the White Balance to daylight and then upped the blacks. (Upping the blacks helps give it that richer, deeper look — notice how the SOOC is kind of flat? Upping the blacks helps with making it look less flat.)

I upped the clarity, vibrance and saturation and also went to the individual hue/saturation sliders, and made the yellow more green and saturated just the reds. (And obviously I cropped this one.)

Eller. Flare.

Now go have some fun with flare! And please ask if you have any questions!

(These photos were all shot in RAW and edited in Lightroom.)

 

Composition: Rule of Thirds — F Stop Fridays

The rule of thirds is a compositional rule of thumb in visual arts such as painting, photography and design. The rule states that an image should be imagined as divided into nine equal parts by two equally-spaced horizontal lines and two equally-spaced vertical lines, and that important compositional elements should be placed along these lines or their intersections. (From Wikipedia.)

I try to follow the Rule of Thirds when I’m composing in camera, rather than shooting and then cropping later to apply the rule. I accomplish this by selecting my camera’s focus point, instead of focusing and recomposing — or worse! — having the camera select the focus point. (Don’t know how to do select the focus point? Go find your manual!) Looking through my own images, it’s obvious I have a little love affair with the camera-right focal points.

IMG_0481edit

I’m trying to move away from that and compose in different ways while still adhering to the Rule of Thirds. So how do you know if your image follows the rule? Any easy way to check in Photoshop is to display gridlines, and then crop if necessary. (If you use Lightroom the crop tool automatically displays rule-of-third gridlines. Handy.)

(Setting up the guideline rules is a little trick I read about on Pioneer Woman photography … )

Open your image in Photoshop. Go to Edit >> Preferences >> Guides, Grid and Slices …

edit_preferences

Set the gridlines to display every 33.33% of the image …

thirtythree

Below is an image with the gridlines displayed. (Also, just to note in case it isn’t clear, these are screenshots. The gridlines don’t show up on your final image — they’re just a visual tool.) See how her eye falls right along one of the vertical lines? That’s good. It would be even better if the top horizontal line and the right vertical line intersected where her eye is, but this is close enough. When something falls on an intersection it can be more powerful, visually. Personally, I also like how the majority of her face fits in one section. (I almost said quadrant, but quadrant is four … ninerant?)

syl

Below is another example of the face filling one of the nine sections. It is also an example of leaving room in the frame for the subject to go. If the composition were flipped (Quinn on the far right with negative space on the left), it wouldn’t work, because he’d be “leaving” the frame. This also comes into play when the subject is looking off camera. You want to make sure that they have “somewhere” to look.

quinn

The image below of my niece Elizabeth is an example of using the horizontal thirds, rather than the vertical thirds of the image, to divide up the visual interest of the image.

liz

A few more examples of images that comply with the Rule of Thirds …

march282009

IMG_0528edit

edit-2757 -- hold for last

This was actually challenging for me to write about, because I just do it now without thinking about it, but I remember when I first learned about it (and especially when I first learned that I should be moving my focus points rather than moving my camera), it was like DING! So, I hope it was helpful to some of you! And it should also be said that like with most rules, there are times to break it.

Happy shooting!

 

A Quick Lens Lesson — F Stop Fridays

(F Stop Fridays is my new weekly photography-related update. Questions about cameras? Post-processing? Style? Post them in the comments or e-mail me, and then look for future photography-related posts on Fridays!)

One of the most discussed topics on photography forums, it seems, is “what lenses do you use?” and “what should I buy next?” It’s something we photographers like to discuss a lot, and there is always some lens that we’re drooling for. Ask any photographer, and they’ll tell you about at least one piece of glass that they can’t wait to get their hands on. (I have a list of about five!)

But for now, I have three lenses (all Canon) that I use on a regular basis. I’m a primes photographer, which means I prefer to used fixed focal length lenses. (As opposed to zooms, which have a focal length range, like the popular 24-70L.) I shoot with a 35mm f/2, a 50mm f/1.4 and a 85mm f/1.8. As a general rule, primes are faster (meaning they have wider apertures, or F stops), so they perform better in low light. (Which is key when you do a lot of shooting indoors.) They also tend to be sharper than zooms, and produce more pleasing bokeh. (And aren’t we all after that delicious bokeh?)

My primary body is a full frame body — the 5D — which means that a 35mm is truly 35mm. A crop sensor body — like a Rebel or a 50D — changes the focal length. So the 35mm on my Rebel is more like a 50mm, because the crop ratio on a Rebel is 1.6x. (This took me a while to figure out!) So the 35 is like a 50 and the 50 is like an 85.  Just something to keep in mind when researching lenses — whether you are shooting full frame or crop sensor.

The 35mm is great for tight indoor situations, when I need to pull back more.

IMG_6750webbw

It’s also fun when I want the angle to be a little wider. Sometimes there can be some distortion, but with dogs, for example, a little distortion can be fun:

LRedit-7813

I recently upgraded from the 50mm 1.8 to the 50mm 1.4. The 1.8 is a FANTASTIC starter lens. It’s less than $100, and it is a terrific little workhorse of a lens. I have hundreds of images in my Flickr stream taken with the 1.8, but I thought it was time to upgrade a little. The 1.4 has a bit of a learning curve (the depth of field is narrower wide open, because it’s 1/3 stop wider, so you can to watch your focus), but I’m loving it. Some recent images with the 1.4 …

IMG_6381web

IMG_6519edit

But my favorite lens is probably my 85mm 1.8. It is just perfect for outdoor portraits, and the bokeh is so beautiful. You really can’t beat it for outdoor portraits, and it also performs well indoors assuming you have the space to back up enough.

LRedit-7786

LRedit-5007

IMG_6940web

 

Beautiful Bokeh — Click, click, click

Bokeh is defined as:

Bokeh (derived from Japanese a noun boke 暈け, meaning “blur” or “haze”) refers to the aesthetic quality of the out-of-focus areas of an image.

The simplest way to think of it is to think of the “depth of field” of your scene. Where is your focus? How far away is it from the background? Open your aperture wide, focus on your subject and experiment! Truly, the easiest and best way to understand bokeh is to practice. (Like most things in photography!)

My bokeh set on Flickr.

(Questions? Post them in the comments!)

Some of my favorite images:

bokehwed6309

Lens: 70-200 f/2.8 | Aperture: 2.8 | Shutter Speed: 1/160 | ISO: 200

LRedit-2104

Lens: 85mm f/1.8 | Aperture: 1.8 | SS: 1/8000 | ISO: 500

IMG_0526edit

Lens: 85mm f/1.8 | Aperture: 1.8 | SS: 1/400 | ISO: 100

march162009

Lens: 85mm f/1.2 | Aperture: 3.2 | SS: 1/800 | ISO: 200

2530761607_20dfd2de0e

Lens: 50mm f/1.8 | Aperture: 2.2 | SS: 1/500 | ISO: 1600

IMG_6060edit

Lens: 50mm f/1.4 | Aperture: 3.2 | SS: 1/320 | ISO: 100