Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk
Thread started 16 Oct 2009 (Friday) 12:59
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

How To Get Blurred Foreground & Background?

 
Michelle ­ Brooks ­ Photography
Goldmember
Michelle Brooks Photography's Avatar
3,182 posts
Joined Sep 2009
SC
Oct 16, 2009 12:59 |  #1

I tried to find a photo online that I could copy & give an example here, but couldn't. I saw a photo of a guy standing astride his bicycle, he was kind of off to the right, and the foreground and background was blurred, but he and the bike were nice and sharp. Does that have to be done in PPing or can it be achieved in camera? If in camera, how is it done? TIA!


Michelle Brooks Photographyexternal link | Flickrexternal link | Facebookexternal link | Twitterexternal link
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
FlyingPhotog's Avatar
57,560 posts
Joined May 2007
Probably Chasing Aircraft
Oct 16, 2009 13:01 |  #2

Learn to control your Depth of Fieldexternal link


Jay
Crosswind Imagesexternal link
Facebook Fan Pageexternal link

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

LOG IN TO REPLY
stsva
Cream of the Crop
stsva's Avatar
Joined Mar 2009
Northern Virginia
Oct 16, 2009 14:01 |  #3

Take a look at this online depth of field calculator: http://www.dofmaster.c​om/dofjs.htmlexternal link


Some Canon stuff and a little bit of Yongnuo.
http://www.pbase.com/s​tsva/profileexternal link
Member of the GIYF
Club and
HAMSTTR
٩ Breeders Club http://photography-on-the.net ...=744235&highlight=h​amsttr Join today!
Image Editing OK

LOG IN TO REPLY
Tedder
Senior Member
326 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Oct 16, 2009 14:51 |  #4



chellyroo:

That would have been done in the camera, not in post-processing (although the effect can be enhanced in post-processing).

Here's an illustration—a yardstick shot at f2.8: http://www.have-camera-will-travel.com/_Media/30d_​3105-2.jpegexternal link

Picture the bicycle and rider in the photo you mention being at the 20" mark in this illustration.

Large apertures such as f2.8 will render shallow depth of field. With a smaller aperture, such as f5.6, more of the yardstick would be in focus.

The yardstick example makes a good try-it-yourself project for experimenting with depth of field, by the way.

—Tedder


Tedder Stephenson's
Flickr Photostream (external link)
(albums: Various Items (external link), Mineral Matters (external link)
, The Bench (external link), and Waterous Disturbulations (external link))

LOG IN TO REPLY
chopperdave
Goldmember
chopperdave's Avatar
1,195 posts
Joined Sep 2008
Oct 16, 2009 14:52 |  #5

maybe it was a shot taken with a tilt and shift lens?

http://kellymoorephoto​graphy.com/mooreblog/?​p=2327external link


David
davidmoorephoto.comexternal link
racecarshots.comexternal link
I feel like I've gone back in time.

LOG IN TO REPLY
shaggymatt
Senior Member
554 posts
Joined Apr 2005
South Central, PA
Oct 16, 2009 14:56 |  #6

chopperdave wrote in post #8835629external link
maybe it was a shot taken with a tilt and shift lens?

http://kellymoorephoto​graphy.com/mooreblog/?​p=2327external link

That was my thought, or a lensbaby. Without seeing the pic it is hard to tell.


Pelican 1614
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
Michelle ­ Brooks ­ Photography
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Michelle Brooks Photography's Avatar
3,182 posts
Joined Sep 2009
SC
Oct 16, 2009 15:09 |  #7

shaggymatt wrote in post #8835656external link
That was my thought, or a lensbaby. Without seeing the pic it is hard to tell.

Photo can be seen at
http://www.davidellisp​hoto.com/external link in collection 1. I understand how to use a large aperture for blurred background and small one for sharp one, what i can't understand with this photo's style is how the subject off to the right is clear but foreground and background all around him is blurred.


Michelle Brooks Photographyexternal link | Flickrexternal link | Facebookexternal link | Twitterexternal link
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
FlyingPhotog's Avatar
57,560 posts
Joined May 2007
Probably Chasing Aircraft
Oct 16, 2009 15:13 |  #8

Looks in focus across the entire image at the same plane as the subject so I'd say it was just shot wide open with an f/1.2 lens probably.


Jay
Crosswind Imagesexternal link
Facebook Fan Pageexternal link

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

LOG IN TO REPLY
CosmoKid
Goldmember
CosmoKid's Avatar
4,235 posts
Joined May 2009
NJ
Oct 16, 2009 15:37 |  #9

Tedder wrote in post #8835623external link



chellyroo:

That would have been done in the camera, not in post-processing (although the effect can be enhanced in post-processing).

Here's an illustration—a yardstick shot at f2.8: http://www.have-camera-will-travel.com/_Media/30d_​3105-2.jpegexternal link

Picture the bicycle and rider in the photo you mention being at the 20" mark in this illustration.

Large apertures such as f2.8 will render shallow depth of field. With a smaller aperture, such as f5.6, more of the yardstick would be in focus.

The yardstick example makes a good try-it-yourself project for experimenting with depth of field, by the way.

—Tedder


please go back to the default font settings. this is terrible. i didn't read it and i am sure a lot of people dont bother reading it.


Joe- 2 bodies, L 2.8 zoom trilogy and a couple of primes
iRocktheShot.comexternal link - Portfolioexternal link

Gear/Feedback
Facebook "Fan" Pageexternal link -

LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
JeffreyG's Avatar
15,017 posts
Gallery: 32 photos
Joined Jan 2007
Detroit, MI
Oct 16, 2009 15:42 |  #10

The linked shot is simply a fast aperture, nothing trickier than that.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and 1DIV and a Panasonic GF-1

LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
SkipD's Avatar
20,251 posts
Joined Dec 2002
Southeastern WI, USA
Oct 16, 2009 16:10 |  #11

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #8835746external link
Looks in focus across the entire image at the same plane as the subject so I'd say it was just shot wide open with an f/1.2 lens probably.

JeffreyG wrote in post #8835899external link
The linked shot is simply a fast aperture, nothing trickier than that.

I agree with both of the above 100%.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
SkipD's Avatar
20,251 posts
Joined Dec 2002
Southeastern WI, USA
Oct 16, 2009 16:11 |  #12

Tedder wrote in post #8835623external link



chellyroo:

That would have been done in the camera, not in post-processing (although the effect can be enhanced in post-processing).

Here's an illustration—a yardstick shot at f2.8: http://www.have-camera-will-travel.com/_Media/30d_​3105-2.jpegexternal link

Picture the bicycle and rider in the photo you mention being at the 20" mark in this illustration.

Large apertures such as f2.8 will render shallow depth of field. With a smaller aperture, such as f5.6, more of the yardstick would be in focus.

The yardstick example makes a good try-it-yourself project for experimenting with depth of field, by the way.

—Tedder

CosmoKid wrote in post #8835869external link
please go back to the default font settings. this is terrible. i didn't read it and i am sure a lot of people dont bother reading it.

Me too. Goofy fonts have no place in a forum.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Michelle ­ Brooks ­ Photography
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Michelle Brooks Photography's Avatar
3,182 posts
Joined Sep 2009
SC
Oct 17, 2009 06:02 |  #13

SkipD wrote in post #8836036external link
I agree with both of the above 100%.

That's what I was looking for. Thank you all!


Michelle Brooks Photographyexternal link | Flickrexternal link | Facebookexternal link | Twitterexternal link
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
SuzyView
Cream of the Crop
SuzyView's Avatar
31,989 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Oct 2005
Northern VA
Oct 17, 2009 06:29 |  #14

To the OP, please do not use all caps in any Titles here in the forum. I have changed your title. All caps means you are yelling or are extremely upset. I doubt you were either.

As for what you are asking, if you have a large aperture lens, this effect is quite easy to do, especially if you zoom into the subject. And you can set your camera to any of the multiple focus points so you can decide which part of the frame is in sharp focus and the rest is blurred. You have a 50 1.8, and that lens is wonderful for nice bokeh. Go out and try it at f1.8 and at the different focus points. You'll get that effect.


Suzie - Still Speaking Canonese!
5D2 :lol:7D :D SL1 (6/14) & G12, the iPad2, iPhone 5 :), 5 L's & 2 Primes 23 bags.
My children are the reason, but it's the passion that drives me to get the perfect image of everything.
My Gear and Wishes

LOG IN TO REPLY
Michelle ­ Brooks ­ Photography
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Michelle Brooks Photography's Avatar
3,182 posts
Joined Sep 2009
SC
Oct 17, 2009 18:26 |  #15

SuzyView wrote in post #8838956external link
To the OP, please do not use all caps in any Titles here in the forum. I have changed your title. All caps means you are yelling or are extremely upset. I doubt you were either.

As for what you are asking, if you have a large aperture lens, this effect is quite easy to do, especially if you zoom into the subject. And you can set your camera to any of the multiple focus points so you can decide which part of the frame is in sharp focus and the rest is blurred. You have a 50 1.8, and that lens is wonderful for nice bokeh. Go out and try it at f1.8 and at the different focus points. You'll get that effect.

Thanks for the advice, especially regarding my 50mm. sorry about the all caps, I've seen lots of them on these boards and didn't think the IM etiquette rule particularly applied here. :oops:


Michelle Brooks Photographyexternal link | Flickrexternal link | Facebookexternal link | Twitterexternal link
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

14,327 views & 0 likes for this thread
How To Get Blurred Foreground & Background?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00114 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.04s
Latest registered member is JShoots
685 guests, 404 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016