LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


How To Get Blurred Foreground & Background?

FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk
Thread started 16 Oct 2009 (Friday) 12:59   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
Michelle ­ Brooks ­ Photography
Goldmember
Michelle Brooks Photography's Avatar
Joined Sep 2009
3,149 posts
SC
[MORE/SHARE]

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!

Post #1, Oct 16, 2009 12:59:13


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
Joined May 2007
57,560 posts
Probably Chasing Aircraft
[MORE/SHARE]

Learn to control your Depth of Fieldexternal link

Post #2, Oct 16, 2009 13:01:03


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
5,937 posts
Northern Virginia
[MORE/SHARE]

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

Post #3, Oct 16, 2009 14:01:40


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
Joined Jan 2009
281 posts
[MORE/SHARE]



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

Post #4, Oct 16, 2009 14:51:43


Tedder Stephenson's
Flickr Photostreamexternal link
(albums: Various Itemsexternal link and Mineral Mattersexternal link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
chopperdave
Goldmember
chopperdave's Avatar
Joined Sep 2008
1,193 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

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

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

Post #5, Oct 16, 2009 14:52:51


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

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
shaggymatt
Senior Member
Joined Apr 2005
552 posts
South Central, PA
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #6, Oct 16, 2009 14:56:54


Pelican 1614
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
Michelle ­ Brooks ­ Photography
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Michelle Brooks Photography's Avatar
Joined Sep 2009
3,149 posts
SC
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #7, Oct 16, 2009 15:09:36


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

LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
FlyingPhotog's Avatar
Joined May 2007
57,560 posts
Probably Chasing Aircraft
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #8, Oct 16, 2009 15:13:20


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
Joined May 2009
4,233 posts
NJ
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #9, Oct 16, 2009 15:37:04


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
Joined Jan 2007
14,433 posts
Detroit, MI
[MORE/SHARE]

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

Post #10, Oct 16, 2009 15:42:38


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/external link
Commercial sports:http://girbach.zenfoli​o.com/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
Joined Dec 2002
19,856 posts
Southeastern WI, USA
[MORE/SHARE]

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%.

Post #11, Oct 16, 2009 16:10:11


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

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
SkipD's Avatar
Joined Dec 2002
19,856 posts
Southeastern WI, USA
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #12, Oct 16, 2009 16:11:05


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and almost 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
Joined Sep 2009
3,149 posts
SC
[MORE/SHARE]

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

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

Post #13, Oct 17, 2009 06:02:49


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

LOG IN TO REPLY
SuzyView
Cream of the Crop
SuzyView's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
31,755 posts
Northern VA
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #14, Oct 17, 2009 06:29:01


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
Joined Sep 2009
3,149 posts
SC
[MORE/SHARE]

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:

Post #15, Oct 17, 2009 18:26:03


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

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
11,261 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 FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00082 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
806 guests, 648 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is Blueme

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.