Show us your "Brenizer Method" shots!

Some really great shots previously. Here is my first, lousy, attempt. Canon T2i and 100L.

This is the field of view I was working with.

RobinF wrote in post #15028154
Anyone have examples using a Zeiss Planar T* 85mm f/1.4?

It really doesn't matter what 85 1.4, the examples you can see that are closest are Nikon's 85 1.4G, or stopped down 85 1.2's, bokeh may be a little different but distortion should be very similar so they'll look pretty similar.

kenshap wrote in post #15031340
Some really great shots previously. Here is my first, lousy, attempt. Canon T2i and 100L.

I don't mean to be an a$$ but I really am not a fan of this. looks like an HDR shot and because it's not even it looks very odd in the after shot. Try stitching it again and editing afterwards.

laxlife1234 wrote in post #15031366
It really doesn't matter what 85 1.4, the examples you can see that are closest are Nikon's 85 1.4G, or stopped down 85 1.2's, bokeh may be a little different but distortion should be very similar so they'll look pretty similar.

I don't mean to be an a$$ but I really am not a fan of this. looks like an HDR shot and because it's not even it looks very odd in the after shot. Try stitching it again and editing afterwards.

It looks like each frame is a different exposure.

Eight_Blade wrote in post #15031653
It looks like each frame is a different exposure.

this.

Your mailbox appears to have a halo like an over processed HDR would.

Eight_Blade wrote in post #15031653
It looks like each frame is a different exposure.

ewheeler20 wrote in post #15031675
this.

Your mailbox appears to have a halo like an over processed HDR would.

I'm thinking it's because he might have put it through an HDR program? I don't think they have different exposures, but several areas have shadows or highlights at different areas, but it could be exposures though.

laxlife1234 wrote in post #15031679
I'm thinking it's because he might have put it through an HDR program? I don't think they have different exposures, but several areas have shadows or highlights at different areas, but it could be exposures though.

No, poor execution and processing.

Looks like a cool technique. I'll have to give this a try.

Eight_Blade wrote in post #15031653
It looks like each frame is a different exposure.

It's not. Used bbf and camera mode set to manual. Sun was going in and out but I didn't notice it until stitched.

Field of view is about 160 degrees. No post editing. Program used was auto stitch.

Here's my 2nd attempt... Just a test but I like this technique.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

The original image after stitching 30 photos and cropping the blank spaces out was around 75MP in size.

Here's the actual framing I had to deal with.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/alanmars/801683​9937/

cjdexter wrote in post #14539232
These look great. I've been trying them, but with limited success.

On my crop camera i've tried my 30mm f/1.4 - but being so 'wide' compared to some of these ones, most things are getting a little distorted. I was going to try my 28-70 f/2.8 but i don't think it's fast enough to really pull it off. Thoughts?

70 2.8 should be enough but going thru the last few pages (I worked backwarks starting the last post and moving to the start) I see that some people don't understand the idea behind the method.

the idea is that you use a 80mm+ lens wide open. using anything like a50mm or in this case a 30mm isn't going to get you the depth of field. which is goes against the point of the method.

if you are standing at the same spot, looking at the same subject with the same settings on the camera a 50mm dof is going to be different than a 80mm or 100mm dof (but at 100mm the field of view will be smaller) The area that's in focus will change between the two types of lenses. the idea is to use a lens like a 80mm f1.8 wide open. because the field of view is narrow you have to take a larger set number of photos to get the same field of view as say a 35mm lens. But because you are keeping the lens wide open you get a better dof than you would normally get if you used a normal 35mm lens.

If you don't understand this (and it's possible that I haven't explained it very well) go to http://www.dofmaster.c​om/dofjs.html and change the lens focal length and see what happens to the numbers.

JimmyDude911 wrote in post #15019021
this looks great man! maybe you could just get rid of that darker rectangle in the water and it would be good

Thank you! I actually just got photoshop, so I did that today.

1st Attempt - some stitching errors - but overall, not too shabby for my first try. With a little more effort in the post process I think this one could work.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/bbsnapshots/8​025553622/

Here's a couple from a recent maternity session: