Begining photography

[RenderMan1010]

Hi, I'm an extremely green photographer, and i'm looking for some honest and constructive criticism about an image. I used a Canon D60 50mm lens. As far as PP, Just some skintone correction, and darkend some of the background. Any comments and suggestions are welcome. Thanks

[DerekSimon]

I like it overall my only suggestion would be to chop off some of the top to put much attention on the subject. The DOF is good but not as strong as it could be.

[RenderMan1010]

Thanks for the suggestion Derek, I'm not sure what DOF is

[scorpio_e]

DOF = depth of field... If you use a lower aperture such as 1.8 the background is more out of focus. The background ( trees ) are pretty complex in you image. If you use a lower aperture, it might simplify the background.

[scorpio_e]

OOOh I do like the image.... Maybe crop as Derek suggested

[MattMoore]

Increased DoF will help contrast the subject from the background (which is distracting). And the color seems a little warm overall IMHO (yes, I use calibrated monitors).

The way it is now, my eyes are forced to the dress, as it has the contrasts from the rest of the shot.

EDIT : I meant DECREASE the DoF to INCREASE the contrast between the subject and the background

[Sisyphus]

Increased DoF will help contrast the subject from the background

Okay, I'm confused. Doesn't a wider aperature (lower f stop) DEcrease the DoF, resulting in more bg blur (OOF area)? Whereas INcreased DoF brings more of the range into focus. So increasing the DoF will have the opposite effect to what you've stated. Unless I'm missing something (not unusual for me).

[scorpio_e]

I think what Matt is saying is the increased DOF helps the separation between the background and the subject.

[scorpio_e]

Here is an example. The subject stands out and the background is blurred. Does this help? http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3329/3339708741_72c855f093_o.jpg

[neil_r]

I a going to buck the trend: I like it, the DOF works well as the background puts the subject in a great woodland context. The bright dress is a fabulous contrast to the rest of the image. All I can say is that if you got lucky with this shot, then you got very lucky and if it came out the way you wanted and expected it to, then you are indeed a talented beginner.

[Sisyphus]

I think what Matt is saying is the increased DOF helps the separation between the background and the subject.

Right, which is why I'm confused. If you increase the DoF, more of the background comes into focus. To get greater separation of subject against background, you want LESS background focus -- not more. That is, you want to DEcrease DoF to gain better separation. You and Matt are saying the opposite -- that increased DoF (more stuff in focus) helps the separation. Hence, my confusion. :confused:

[neil_r]

Low Number = Large Aperture = Shallow DOF = More Separation
High Number = Small Aperture = Deep DOF = Less Separation

[Sisyphus]

Low Number = Large Aperture = Shallow DOF = More Separation
High Number = Small Aperture = Deep DOF = Less Separation

Yes, that is my understanding. Therefore:

Low Number = Large Aperture = Shallow DOF = More Separation => DEcrease DoF.
High Number = Small Aperture = Deep DOF = Less Separation => INcrease DoF.

[neil_r]

Spot on ;-)

[DAMphyne]

I agree with Neil, the woods adds to the location of the subject. More blur may have taken away from the impact.

I think DOF should be described as "narrow" and "deep" instead of increase/decrease, seems like the term may be confusing.

[scorpio_e]

Low Number = Large Aperture = Shallow DOF = More Separation
High Number = Small Aperture = Deep DOF = Less Separation
bw! Well stated Neil !!!

[MattMoore]

yes, sorry...I did mean DECREASE the DoF to INCREASE the contrast between the subject and the background

[mjmackinnon]

Personally I like it the way it is.

I wouldn't crop the top as you would loose the feel of standing in front of some large spruce (??) trees. Gives some depth of the size of your subject to the trees behind.

As far as DOF.. I like it. The only place you can fault is that the stick she is holding blends somewhat into the tree behind it. but it isn't to any degree that you can't make out that she is holding a stick. If you blur the background any more, you will loose the impact of the trees and wetlands.

This shot is a keeper.

Matt.

[Steelydad]

Agree with Neil and AMphyne re the woods.

[Bill Boehme]

Increased DoF will help contrast the subject from the background (which is distracting). And the color seems a little warm overall IMHO (yes, I use calibrated monitors).

The way it is now, my eyes are forced to the dress, as it has the contrasts from the rest of the shot.

EDIT : I meant DECREASE the DoF to INCREASE the contrast between the subject and the background

Okay, I'm confused. Doesn't a wider aperature (lower f stop) DEcrease the DoF, resulting in more bg blur (OOF area)? Whereas INcreased DoF brings more of the range into focus. So increasing the DoF will have the opposite effect to what you've stated. Unless I'm missing something (not unusual for me).

...... lots of ensuing discussion about DOF ..........

yes, sorry...I did mean DECREASE the DoF to INCREASE the contrast between the subject and the background

Well, I am glad that I came back to revisit this post -- the DOF comments this morning had me a bit confused as I was mulling that over by trying to envision better separation with greater DOF.

BTW, I think that the original image is very well done -- any suggestions to do things differently can be mostly attributed to personal preferences. I would be very pleased to do as well as you did.

[Marcia]

I like the image as shot and think that you are very lucky as a beginner to get such a shot. It bodes well for your future as a photographer.