Bokeh vs. Perfect Clarity

[Davidsl222]

I'm reading a book called Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. A good read with much basic stuff and many reminders for someone like me who has been taking photos for close to 30 years.

One section of the book is about storytelling shots or shots where the entire DOF is sharp. The author accomplishes the shots by using f/22 or higher, a tripod, and manual focus that looks out of focus in the viewfinder.

Sometimes, it's a manual focus to infinity, sometimes to the first 1/3 of the photo and then sometimes to 2 feet. He does not explain why he uses the different manual focuses for the different lens focal lengths. But -- each one of the photos are magnificently clear throughout the entire range.

Can anyone else explain it? Thanks!

(and please no basic f-stop anwers)

[In2Photos]

One of the things you might want to look at is a DOF calculator. I am sure you know that f/22 has a very large DOF, but depending on where you are focused and what focal length you are using, your results will vary. I assume he uses MF here because he is using a tripod (no problems with stability), using a small aperture (focus doesn't have to be spot on like f/2), and he really has no magical focal point (like a person's eyes). The one thing he wants you to do is lead the person looking at the photo to where you want them to look. This can be accomplished with focus as well as lines/patterns/colors/etc.

BTW f/22 can lead to problems with diffraction. Your sensor is probably good up to around f/13 or so. A quick search here can explain it better but basically the photo can become soft due to diffraction.

[Davidsl222]

I read (based on recommendations) about the hyperfocal point. Does one carry a calculator and meter stick to get the perfect shot? I mostly do OK with choosing the focal point based on what I am trying to convey in my photo -- but now I am facinated with the theoretical perfect focal point for clarity.

[In2Photos]

I read (based on recommendations) about the hyperfocal point. Does one carry a calculator and meter stick to get the perfect shot? I mostly do OK with choosing the focal point based on what I am trying to convey in my photo -- but now I am facinated with the theoretical perfect focal point for clarity.

I don't but by all means experiment. After all your "film" is free.

[Curtis N]

Does one carry a calculator and meter stick to get the perfect shot?Depth-of-field is as much concept as it is calculation. You can calculate very precise numbers, but they're all based on a fairly arbitrary variable called the circle of confusion.

There are DOF calculator programs that will work in a PDA, but I think using something like that in the field is overkill. What may be more practical is printing a few hyperfocal charts for various focal lengths and keep them in your bag.

Lots of info about this topic at http://dofmaster.com
Also you can download my Excel-based DOF calculator by clicking the link in my signature.

[PhotosGuy]

Sometimes, it's a manual focus to infinity, sometimes to the first 1/3 of the photo and then sometimes to 2 feet. At a distance, DOF extends 1/3 toward you & 2/3 away from the point of focus. In very close-ups, DOF extends 1/2 toward you & 1/2 away from the point of focus.
So if you're 10 feet from a subject and have a DOF of 3 feet, then everything from a distance of 9 feet to 12 feet will be inside the DOF

[nation]

Not sure what camera you have but here's a handy link to making your own DOF and hyperfocal calculator:

http://www.night-ray.com/comments.php?id=68_0_5_0_C

[Bakewell]

I'm reading a book called Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. A good read with much basic stuff and many reminders for someone like me who has been taking photos for close to 30 years.

One section of the book is about storytelling shots or shots where the entire DOF is sharp. The author accomplishes the shots by using f/22 or higher, a tripod, and manual focus that looks out of focus in the viewfinder.

Sometimes, it's a manual focus to infinity, sometimes to the first 1/3 of the photo and then sometimes to 2 feet. He does not explain why he uses the different manual focuses for the different lens focal lengths. But -- each one of the photos are magnificently clear throughout the entire range.

Can anyone else explain it? Thanks!

(and please no basic f-stop anwers)

Peterson offers a little more detail in the last paragraph of page 62 of his book.

[Davidsl222]

Peterson offers a little more detail in the last paragraph of page 62 of his book.

Just a little though. Thanks everyone for your input on this question. I often focused to 1/3 of the scene and then recompossed but not because I knew to do this. I just did it. Now I know there is a more of a science to it than I knew.

Again, thanks for everyone's input.