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

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 04 Apr 2009 (Saturday) 17:05
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

STICKY: Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)

 
snkp360
Member
69 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Napa, CA
     
Jun 16, 2011 10:10 |  #151

Wilt wrote in post #12603328 (external link)
snkp360, My stepdaughter was coxswain for a women's 8, won gold in her HS freshman year at Saint Ignatius in the Regionals. Then in college (CSLB) she cox'd men's 8 and men's 4, placed 8th at Nationals in men's 4 (sophomore/junior year??), then after their stroke graduated they placed 12th at Nationals. This all ended in 2008 when she graduated. So I know that 2km long lagoon well. Who did you row for, and how long ago?

BTW, 'Larry's America's Cup Trimaran' at Oracle is a monohull actually, this 24-meter IACC boat was campaigned in 2006, I believe, when BMW and Allianz both sponsored...to illustrate and perhaps thrill competitive sailors like me:

[IMG]http://i69.photobucket​.com …iltonw/IMG_1649​s.jpg[/IG] (external link)

[IMG]http://i69.photobucket​.com …iltonw/IMG_1666​s.jpg[/IG] (external link)

Good stuff, from the bokeh backgrounds all I had to compare on was the paint scheme and side profile :)

I rowed for Serra High School from 2000-2003 and was the captain/stroke of the Varsity 8, Lightweight 8 and Lightweight 4. Senior year my Lightweight 4 took 3rd at Regionals in Folsom.

After high school I decided to forgo crew, mainly because Cal Poly - SLO didn't have a team, and joined the water ski team LOL


Gripped Canon EOS 40D
Σ17-50 f/2.8 EX DC OS | EF 50 f/1.8 | EF 70-200 f/2.8L | 580EX II
DAKINE Mission Photo Pack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
40,183 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2023
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Jun 16, 2011 10:54 |  #152

snkp360 wrote in post #12603674 (external link)
Good stuff, from the bokeh backgrounds all I had to compare on was the paint scheme and side profile :)

I rowed for Serra High School from 2000-2003 and was the captain/stroke of the Varsity 8, Lightweight 8 and Lightweight 4. Senior year my Lightweight 4 took 3rd at Regionals in Folsom.

After high school I decided to forgo crew, mainly because Cal Poly - SLO didn't have a team, and joined the water ski team LOL

Back on photographic topic, 'bokeh backgrounds' really ought to be 'out of focus backgrounds'. Bokeh is an incidental characteristic of the out of focus backgrouds...a usual tele lens at f/8 has the same amount of out of focus blur as a catadiotropic (mirror) tele lens at f/8, but the mirror lens has what most folks consider to be 'ugly bokeh' donut highlights.

https://photography-on-the.net …?p=12026725&pos​tcount=138

We've perhaps crossed paths at Lake Natoma or at Windmere, as my stepdaughter graduated from SI in 2004!


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alexdesign
Senior Member
427 posts
Joined Apr 2011
     
Aug 07, 2011 15:16 |  #153

Excellent thread. Great stuff. Love this thread.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/62731114@N02/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Picture ­ North ­ Carolina
Gaaaaa! DOH!! Oops!
9,056 posts
Likes: 120
Joined Apr 2006
Location: North Carolina
     
Aug 08, 2011 06:15 |  #154

It's encouraging to know that those threads that are truly helpful, such as this one, continue to be discovered on a regular basis.


Website (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jay4prez
Junior Member
21 posts
Joined Mar 2011
Location: New York City
     
Sep 22, 2011 12:33 |  #155

I read through this entire thing, and wow what a wealth of knowledge.....

I've better learned how to acheieve that certain look I want/imagine in my photographs now.

Thanks for sharing this.

As a new member I just would like to say thank you to all of you senior members (no pun intended) having you guys around is a blessing to those new in the field/hobby and those looking to learn why certain things come out the way they do...the theory behind the practice.


My Website (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Model Mayhem (external link) | 5D Mk II: Gripped T1i : 50mm F/1.8 (Nifty), 70-200 2.8 SIGMA
***The Amateur Photographer***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
funphotoexpress
Mostly Lurking
18 posts
Joined Aug 2011
     
Sep 29, 2011 18:35 |  #156

neat




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
easedrop
Member
39 posts
Joined Apr 2010
     
Nov 02, 2011 07:47 as a reply to  @ snkp360's post |  #157

Thanks for this, very helpful.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shoal
Member
73 posts
Joined Jul 2011
     
Dec 31, 2011 22:53 |  #158

Thanks so much for this thread!!!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chesterjohnphoto
Goldmember
Avatar
1,525 posts
Likes: 19
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jan 21, 2012 19:39 |  #159

Thanks so much for this, nice write up!


Facebook page (since Jan 2010) (external link)
Flickr (since June 2013) (external link)
....I kill ambient light, use Profoto light and control it my way

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
flyinlow007
Member
139 posts
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Savage, MN USA
     
Apr 24, 2012 14:47 |  #160

Great information, answered alot of questions for me


Canon 5DmkIII gripped, Canon 60D gripped
Canon 70-200 f2.8L II IS, Canon 85 f1.8,
Canon 50 f1.8, Canon 18-55 EF-S IS, Tamron 28-75 f2.8,
Canon 100 2.8 macro, Canon 1.4x II, Canon 2.0x II
Canon 580ex II, Sekonic 758-DR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
swang9
Member
64 posts
Joined Apr 2012
     
Apr 30, 2012 16:13 |  #161

learned a lot from this thread!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
datune
Member
53 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2012
     
May 04, 2012 13:52 |  #162

Great thread, thanks so much for this valuable information!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
effae
Member
Avatar
74 posts
Joined Jul 2010
     
May 04, 2012 15:46 as a reply to  @ datune's post |  #163

What an interesting read! :clap:


Gripped 550D & 30mm f1.4, 50E & 50mm f1.8, 580EXII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WaltA
Goldmember
Avatar
3,855 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 108
Joined Feb 2006
Location: White Rock, BC, Canada
     
May 28, 2012 17:36 |  #164

Wilt wrote in post #7667307 (external link)
This graphic shows the effect of changing camera position on the relative size of two objects to one another. As you move back, the apparent size of the background item increases in size, relative to the main subject.

QUOTED IMAGE

Both my America's Cup series and my Vertical Blinds series (following posts) show the practical effect of the theory depicted in the graphic.

Wilt, I know this is an old post and I've read "most" this this thread and I have a question that I hope has not been already asked and answered.

Is the phenomenon that you describe above enhanced even further when the distances between the 4 objects increases?

The reason I ask is that when I lived on the west coast a few years back I noticed a strange thing happening. Lets say that "A" was a pier I'm shooting while standing on the beach in White Rock BC. The "other item" is Orca Island 10 or 15 miles out to sea.

As I moved back off the beach to location B and even further up to 4 miles back (and higher in elevation) I noticed that Orca Island seemed to be getting bigger. As a matter of fact I could see a lot more detail, such as the cell towers and antenna on top of a hill on the island that I could not make out when I was on the beach at sea level.

It seems that moving back (a couple of miles) as well as up ( 500 or 600 feet) seemed to exaggerate amount the background item grew in size.

Your thoughts? (Great thread, by the way)


Walt
400D, 5D, 7D and a bag of stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
40,183 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2023
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
May 28, 2012 17:56 |  #165

WaltA wrote in post #14497002 (external link)
Wilt, I know this is an old post and I've read "most" this this thread and I have a question that I hope has not been already asked and answered.

Is the phenomenon that you describe above enhanced even further when the distances between the 4 objects increases?

The reason I ask is that when I lived on the west coast a few years back I noticed a strange thing happening. Lets say that "A" was a pier I'm shooting while standing on the beach in White Rock BC. The "other item" is Orca Island 10 or 15 miles out to sea.

As I moved back off the beach to location B and even further up to 4 miles back (and higher in elevation) I noticed that Orca Island seemed to be getting bigger. As a matter of fact I could see a lot more detail, such as the cell towers and antenna on top of a hill on the island that I could not make out when I was on the beach at sea level.

It seems that moving back (a couple of miles) as well as up ( 500 or 600 feet) seemed to exaggerate amount the background item grew in size.

Your thoughts? (Great thread, by the way)

BTW, location A and location B are positions for you to be standing with your camera, and the two Arrows are the objects that you see, one is your primary subject and the other is merely some object in the background. The relationship of the absolute size of the two arrows does not change. But if I move myself from point A to point B, the background item seems to grow in size relative to the primary subject within the frame. What is happening is that my position relative to my main subject is changing much more radically than my position relative to the background object.

When I put a longer FL lens at point B in order to keep my subject about the same size in the frame, the background items looms larger in the photo compared to my main subject...a phenomenon often referred to as the 'compression' caused by a telephoto because it seems as if the distance between the subject and the background item is reduced compared to reality, but which is actually caused by the change from position A to position B! In the 'compression' of the distance between the two objects, I am seeing actually a difference of perspective, a change in relationship of my subject to the background item. My lens FL change simply altered the framing of my subject.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

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

198,493 views & 8 likes for this thread
Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance? (a tutorial)
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is brotherbear86
770 guests, 291 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.