Maintaining Narrow DOF, Boceh in closed Studio Environment

[crsouser]

Hi,
I have an 85mm 1.2 that I absolutely love its Boceh on but I think I am missing something when wanting to shoot with it in a studio lit environment. Even when turning my AB800s to minimal power I can't go anywhere near that open on my Aperture without blowing things out.

Is there something I am missing to getting a really narrow DOF when working in a bright environment?

I read about using an ND filters but would prefer not to if I can avoid it as I don't want to sacrifice EQ.

Thanks in advance for telling me what I am missing here.

Christopher

[bolantej]

Try bouncing the light off a distant wall or card. I have heard to reduce the output even more, to bounce off of a neutral grey card. If not, just use ambient lighting, or hotlights, which typically have less power than strobes.

[Lotto]

For shooting at f1.4, I just use the modeling light in softbox.

[sandpiper]

I read about using an ND filters but would prefer not to if I can avoid it as I don't want to sacrifice EQ.



Good quality ND filters won't noticeably affect IQ, however they are a bit expensive. Using a little lateral thinking though, suggests that you could simply put ND gels on the lights instead. Same effect but nothing in front of the lens, also a bit cheaper as the gels don't have to be of high optical quality as a lens filter does (although you may need more of them!).

The other (even cheaper) option is to turn the lights around and bounce off a grey card reflector (for example). The problem with this is that you can't control the light as easily, but it's ok for a relatively shadowless look.

[magicmikey]

I understand wanting nice Bokeh but why shoot at f/1.2? I really don't see the point in shooting below f/4.0 in the studio when shooting a portrait. (You didn't say what you are shooting so I may be missing the point here.) Even at f/4.0, it's hard to get enough depth of field to make sure both eyes are in perfect focus unless the subject is square to the camera.

[Wilt]

I understand wanting nice Bokeh but why shoot at f/1.2? I really don't see the point in shooting below f/4.0 in the studio when shooting a portrait. (You didn't say what you are shooting so I may be missing the point here.) Even at f/4.0, it's hard to get enough depth of field to make sure both eyes are in perfect focus unless the subject is square to the camera.

You obviously are not in tune with what is popular these days, Mikey! 1.5" DOF that you get with 85mm f/1.4 at 9' shooting distance helps to key one eye in focus while blurring the wart on the end of the nose so it is less objectionable.

[Curtis N]

The usual approaches have been mentioned. Here's one more.

Instead of using the Alienbees, use your 580EX II and perhaps a reflector. You can dial that puppy down to 1/128.

[PacAce]

Hi,
I have an 85mm 1.2 that I absolutely love its Boceh on but I think I am missing something when wanting to shoot with it in a studio lit environment. Even when turning my AB800s to minimal power I can't go anywhere near that open on my Aperture without blowing things out.

Is there something I am missing to getting a really narrow DOF when working in a bright environment?

I read about using an ND filters but would prefer not to if I can avoid it as I don't want to sacrifice EQ.

Thanks in advance for telling me what I am missing here.

Christopher
The reason a lens has such a wide aperture, like f/1.2 and f/1.4, is so that you can use it for available light shooting. If flash or studio lighting were available, such a wide aperture wouldn't be necessary in the first place.

If you want to blur out the background, instead of taking the brute force approach, try the scientific approach. Determine how much DOF you really need and then using a DOF calculator, figure out what minimum aperture is that you'll need, with the subject placed as far away from the background as you can, and how close you have to be to the subject to get the required DOF.

[magicmikey]

You obviously are not in tune with what is popular these days, Mikey! 1.5" DOF that you get with 85mm f/1.4 at 9' shooting distance helps to key one eye in focus while blurring the wart on the end of the nose so it is less objectionable.

That's what Photoshop is for!:lol: (Wilt has heard me question the use of wide open apertures in studio work before!)

[magicmikey]

The reason a lens has such a wide aperture, like f/1.2 and f/1.4, is so that you can use it for available light shooting. If flash or studio lighting were available, such a wide aperture wouldn't be necessary in the first place.

If you want to blur out the background, instead of taking the brute force approach, try the scientific approach. Determine how much DOF you really need and then using a DOF calculator, figure out what minimum aperture is that you'll need, with the subject placed as far away from the background as you can, and how close you have to be to the subject to get the required DOF.

Well put.:)

[airfrogusmc]

I shoot formal portraits all the time with my White Lightnings 1200 at f2-4 and my subjects usually about 5/6 ft from backdrop which makes the BD go very soft. Its a great effect.

[steveathome]

What about ND filters on your strobes?

Edit: Sorry just noticed Post #4 already suggested this.

[airfrogusmc]

at 2.8

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_9229.jpg

I just dial my WL 1200 down all the way and set the 5D at 50 ISO. Oh 85 1.2L at 2.8..

[airfrogusmc]

I usually get the quality of light that I want then work on getting the f stop I need and the lighting ratio (background light). Moving the light changes the quality of light...

[Titus213]

I understand wanting nice Bokeh but why shoot at f/1.2? ...

Because it's there...:lol:

[TMR Design]

If you haven't already done so, dropping the ISO on the camera will let you open up a bit.

Depth of field is interesting and using a depth of field calculator and conducting some simple tests will help you better understand how it works. It's a common misconception that you need to shoot at apertures such as f/1.2 or even f/2 to get blurred backgrounds and sharp foregrounds.

This is a shot I did using an 85mm lens at f/6.3 with the subject about 6 feet from the background and about 5 or 6 feet from subject to camera.

[magicmikey]

Nice shot, Robert. That's a perfect example of not having to go wide open to get a good "Bokeh". On top of that, using f/6.3 gives you some latitude on the sharpness of her eyes, lips and hair.

Michael

[TMR Design]

Thanks Michael.

I'm not afraid to work closely with my clients and establish comfort level at close range. This allows me to use an 85mm or a 105mm lens for tight shots and still get shallow depth of field at f/8 or f/9.

I did a series of shots that I worked so tight with a 105mm lens at f/8 and not only did I get beautiful bokeh in the background but there was a hint of blur in the back of the ear and outline of the hair.

Sometimes having a small space works to your advantage. :D

[Titus213]

Very nice indeed, excellent example.

[Jarrad]

@ 1.4

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2082/2205204213_38d9d1c9e2.jpg

Just use the modeling lights.
Or ND gel your light source.

:)

[steveathome]

Excellent image Robert

[Curtis N]

Robert!

You took a picture of something other than a mannequin or a light meter?

Man, you're letting me down. Your membership in the master measurebator's guild is suspended, pending further investigation.

(Nice shot!)

[TMR Design]

Very nice indeed, excellent example.

Thank you Dave :D

Excellent image Robert

Hey Steve. I appreciate that.

Robert!

You took a picture of something other than a mannequin or a light meter?

Man, you're letting me down. Your membership in the master measurebator's guild is suspended, pending further investigation.

(Nice shot!)

Believe it or not Curtis, I've been photographing real people for some time now. I actually spend more time taking pictures than I do measurebating. I just don't hold up a banner or post every time I take a picture :D

[dragulaz]

Hi,
I have an 85mm 1.2 that I absolutely love its Boceh on but I think I am missing something when wanting to shoot with it in a studio lit environment. Even when turning my AB800s to minimal power I can't go anywhere near that open on my Aperture without blowing things out.

Is there something I am missing to getting a really narrow DOF when working in a bright environment?

I read about using an ND filters but would prefer not to if I can avoid it as I don't want to sacrifice EQ.

Thanks in advance for telling me what I am missing here.

Christopher

I had a similar problem with the B800's. I wasn't trying to shoot at apertures that wide, but I had a problem even opening up to f/4 and f/5.6. I seemed to always be on the lowest end of the power slider. The B800's were simply too much power for my room and shooting style. I ended up trading them in for DLite-2's and couldn't be happier with the results so far.

I'm not sure this is your situation, but that sums up my experience. I'm sure there are things I could have done (ND filters, feathering more, etc) to get the right light levels, but as one wise sage once told me...why settle for letting the light control you, when you could be in total control of the light.

[magicmikey]

@ 1.4

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2082/2205204213_38d9d1c9e2.jpg

Just use the modeling lights.
Or ND gel your light source.

:)

No offense, Jarrad, but I think that shot would look a lot better with a greater depth of field. I'm not sure what you were specifically trying to accomplish so I may be way off base. (Obviously, we each have our own ideas about how a portrait should look and what effect we're trying to achieve.)

[magicmikey]

I had a similar problem with the B800's. I wasn't trying to shoot at apertures that wide, but I had a problem even opening up to f/4 and f/5.6. I seemed to always be on the lowest end of the power slider. The B800's were simply too much power for my room and shooting style. I ended up trading them in for DLite-2's and couldn't be happier with the results so far.

I'm not sure this is your situation, but that sums up my experience. I'm sure there are things I could have done (ND filters, feathering more, etc) to get the right light levels, but as one wise sage once told me...why settle for letting the light control you, when you could be in total control of the light.

Nothing against the DLites but the 2s are lower in power than the B800 so, if the OP really needs to get less power, he should check out Alienbees policy for upgrading. If the strobes are within their 2-year warranty period, they can be upgraded. Maybe, Paul C. Buff would allow a "downgrade" to B400s:
http://www.alienbees.com/guarantee.html

Michael

[airfrogusmc]

Your distance to subject has allot to do with it to. The shot I showed is an exec portrait taken on location shooting tight is not an option.

Here 5.6 same type set up
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_3825-1.jpg

f/2
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_9229.jpg

The BG is softer and more pleasing at 2.8 (bottom) from this distance from subject and subject distance from BG.

[Wilt]

This is a shot I did using an 85mm lens at f/6.3 with the subject about 6 feet from the background and about 5 or 6 feet from subject to camera.

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that Robert's mannequin head is nowhere as attractive as the subject portrayed in his example shot! Can you introduce me (to the subject, not the mannequin)?!

[TMR Design]

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that Robert's mannequin head is nowhere as attractive as the subject portrayed in his example shot! Can you introduce me (to the subject, not the mannequin)?!

Sure WIlt. Next time you're on the east coast I'll introduce you. :D

[Jarrad]

Obviously, we each have our own ideas about how a portrait should look and what effect we're trying to achieve.

Agreed

[dragulaz]

Nothing against the DLites but the 2s are lower in power than the B800 so, if the OP really needs to get less power, he should check out Alienbees policy for upgrading. If the strobes are within their 2-year warranty period, they can be upgraded. Maybe, Paul C. Buff would allow a "downgrade" to B400s:
http://www.alienbees.com/guarantee.html

Michael

Okay Mr Obvious, that was my point. :) I didn't mean to suggest he go for D-Lites necessarily, but that he consider a lower powered light. And I wouldn't consider trading the B800 for the B400 a downgrade. They have the same feaures, the B400 is just lower in power.

[magicmikey]

Okay Mr Obvious, that was my point. :) I didn't mean to suggest he go for D-Lites necessarily, but that he consider a lower powered light. And I wouldn't consider trading the B800 for the B400 a downgrade. They have the same feaures, the B400 is just lower in power.

I had to read that twice to get your point about the B400 not being a downgrade. (A little slow tonight, I guess.:) Been editing photos for a couple of hours and I think the brain is turning to mush!)

I suppose it would be more accurate to call going from a B800 to a B400 a "crossgrade." The good news is Paul C. Buff, Inc. has a very good policy about making upgrades (and likely crossgrades) so it would be very economical to make the change if the lights are still under warranty.

Michael