DOF

I was playing around with my iPhone app Simple DOF, My camera was 10' 10" (according to my laser measure) away from the wall so I entered in Focal Length 50mm (was using the nifty fifty), Aperture 5.6 and Distance 10' 10" the app showed In front of subject was 2' 10" but when I took the picture of me standing against the wall I was out of focus. I was using on camera flash with SS 1/200 and ISO 200.
Behind the subject was 5' 10" according to the app, Hyper Focus Distance was 30' 4" Hyperfocal Distance does it mean that I should have been standing at 15' 2" to get me in focus? I am thinking standing against the wall I was to close to the In Front of Subject 2' 10" focus range. The wall or I should have said the door I was standing against the wood grain was in focus.

Thanks
Don

One thing that is missing from your equation is the print size and viewing distance.....without that information, acceptable DOF is not able to be accurately calculated. Also, acceptable DOF is somewhat subjective....what's acceptable to someone else may not be acceptable to you.

Only the plane at 10'.10" will be In actual focus.

The bits in front of and behind that distance are within "acceptable" focus. This is subjective.

The depth of field achieved by using the hyperfocal distance means that you would have had to focus at or beyond the hyperfocal distance, or set the focus measurements on your camera to that distance( not so easy with todays lenses).

How were you looking at the image with you in front of the wall? DOF calculators are based on something around a 10x8 print held at arms length, if you are judging it by looking at it on your monitor at 100% then you are probably viewing a small part of a 5 foot image. The more you enlarge the image, the shallower the DOF becomes. So at 100% view your 2'10" in front of the focused plane is reduced dramatically. If you view it at a size where the whole image can be seen on screen at once, at around 10 inches on the long edge, you may find the sharpness acceptable.

Also, keep in mind that DOF distances are not what is "in focus", they are what is "acceptably sharp". The only bit in focus is the distance you actually focused on, then it gets gradually softer until it becomes "unacceptable", at which point you have reached the edge of the DOF. So simply being within the DOF does not mean that an object will be pin sharp and in focus, just that is still close enough to be acceptable.

sandpiper wrote in post #16451795
How were you looking at the image with you in front of the wall? DOF calculators are based on something around a 10x8 print held at arms length, if you are judging it by looking at it on your monitor at 100% then you are probably viewing a small part of a 5 foot image. The more you enlarge the image, the shallower the DOF becomes. So at 100% view your 2'10" in front of the focused plane is reduced dramatically. If you view it at a size where the whole image can be seen on screen at once, at around 10 inches on the long edge, you may find the sharpness acceptable.

Also, keep in mind that DOF distances are not what is "in focus", they are what is "acceptably sharp". The only bit in focus is the distance you actually focused on, then it gets gradually softer until it becomes "unacceptable", at which point you have reached the edge of the DOF. So simply being within the DOF does not mean that an object will be pin sharp and in focus, just that is still close enough to be acceptable.

I used live view 10 times mag and focused on the door (wall) then got against the door and triggered the camera, I was thinking focused on the door and me standing up against it that the DOF would put me in focus but from reading here I see there is a difference between sharpness and focus, I guess I have the focus but need to figure out the sharpness because I have been saying from day one that my pictures looked OOF, dull and flat.

DigitalDon wrote in post #16456546
I used live view 10 times mag and focused on the door (wall) then got against the door and triggered the camera, I was thinking focused on the door and me standing up against it that the DOF would put me in focus but from reading here I see there is a difference between sharpness and focus, I guess I have the focus but need to figure out the sharpness because I have been saying from day one that my pictures looked OOF, dull and flat.

I'd do a little more "real world" testing"

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=857871

DigitalDon wrote in post #16456546
I have been saying from day one that my pictures looked OOF, dull and flat.

Compared to what, and how much processing are you doing?

If you are comparing the images straight from your camera to shots you see online, you need to bear in mind that most shots posted will have been edited and processed to look their best, they will also have had sharpening added.

Dull, flat shots are usually down to dull flat light, so if you are shooting in dull weather conditions that is what you will get. However, playing with the file in processing can add the punch that is missing. A lot of my shots look dull and flat straight out of the camera, but they will never be seen by anybody else like that. By the time they are shown to the outside world they will have been processed into much brighter, punchier images.

Yes, getting it "right in camera" is important, but is only half the job. However good it comes out (and in many conditions there is only so good you can get it) it can be significantly improved upon in editing. Photography has always been a two stage process, stage one in camera and stage two in the darkroom, or nowadays the computer.

Hot dam finally got it to link to my photobucket, click the link and see what I am talking about when I say blurred, flat, dull OR out of focus. click on a picture, Scroll down on the right you will see Media Info next to my user name click load more to see EXIF data.

Edited to add, I think all were taken with the EFS 55 - 250 mm lense f/4-5.6 IS II and yes they were edited in Lightroom 4 and cropped. You can click on the magnifying glass under each picture to enlarge the picture, click two time on it to see full size image.


http://s1347.photobuck​et.com/user/ron612/lib​rary/

You have a very slow shutter speed for a number of these (e.g. 1/50s @ 250mm equiv). The IS will help with your movement but not subject movement. Some just require a boost in contrast and a bit of sharpening. Also, when you make largish crops, things will appear fuzzier than if you didn't (i.e. you are effectively enlarging any slight focus issues or motion blur).

e-k

E-K wrote in post #16469064
You have a very slow shutter speed for a number of these (e.g. 1/50s @ 250mm equiv). The IS will help with your movement but not subject movement. Some just require a boost in contrast and a bit of sharpening. Also, when you make largish crops, things will appear fuzzier than if you didn't (i.e. you are effectively enlarging any slight focus issues or motion blur).

e-k

Thank you so much for taking the time to look at the pictures for me, I think you answered my question when you mentioned the crop factor, the ball game pictures were cropped a good bit.

The ones taken by the lake I was thinking at the time I took them that I had to stay close enough in case the stroller started rolling towards the lake that I would have had time to catch him before he went in the lake (10 to 15 feet away) I knew it was impossible because there were roots coming out of the ground where the duck have wore the dirt away, guess I am overly cautious when it comes to a two year old.
I noticed one picture at the lake was two ducks almost side by side at the bottom of of the photo and the duck on the right it's eye was sharper (in focus) more than the duck to it's left, I was using center point focus on the two year old and pointing at his eyes, but the duck at the botton right seemed to be more in focus than the kid was. Was using the nifty fifty lens.

The photos in the house I think I used my 18-55 mm lens, the IS i don't think I have ever switched it off since I bought the camera and lens kit.

One more question, do the preset setting of landscape, portrait, faithfull modes apply if I am shooting RAW, I do the contrast, sharping etc in Lightroom 4. Just wondering if I set the camera to portrait mode with it's defalt setting will it add the contrast and sharpening to a RAW file.

Thanks again for your help
Don

DigitalDon wrote in post #16469288
One more question, do the preset setting of landscape, portrait, faithfull modes apply if I am shooting RAW, I do the contrast, sharping etc in Lightroom 4. Just wondering if I set the camera to portrait mode with it's defalt setting will it add the contrast and sharpening to a RAW file.

Picture Styles do not affect RAW data at all...they do affect the creation of the embedded JPG preview image which is what shows on your camera LCD after you take a photo. But while the preview may have the 'look' of the chosen style, none of those settings are used by programs like Photoshop ACR or Lightroom to create their previews.
(If you use Canon-supplied DPP, it does use that Style information to view a preview that looks like the camera-created one, but you can still totally deviate from that using DPP!)

DigitalDon wrote in post #16469288
I noticed one picture at the lake was two ducks almost side by side at the bottom of of the photo and the duck on the right it's eye was sharper (in focus) more than the duck to it's left, I was using center point focus on the two year old and pointing at his eyes, but the duck at the botton right seemed to be more in focus than the kid was. Was using the nifty fifty lens.

Can you provide a link to the specific image or say which image it is? Is it 14 (o=13)?

e-k

The focus or sharpeness is between the two white ducks at the bottom of the photo, maybe the duck on the left moved some when I took the picture.

IMAGE LINK: http://s1347.photobuck​et.com …0680_zps6feb07d​a.jpg.html

Wilt wrote in post #16469321
Picture Styles do not affect RAW data at all...they do affect the creation of the embedded JPG preview image which is what shows on your camera LCD after you take a photo. But while the preview may have the 'look' of the chosen style, none of those settings are used by programs like Photoshop ACR or Lightroom to create their previews.
(If you use Canon-supplied DPP, it does use that Style information to view a preview that looks like the camera-created one, but you can still totally deviate from that using DPP!)

So when shooting in RAW, a Picture Style set to add + 7 sharpen will not add that Sharpening to the RAW file?

DigitalDon wrote in post #16471731
So when shooting in RAW, a Picture Style set to add + 7 sharpen will not add that Sharpening to the RAW file?

The sharpening is added to the preview JPG which is embedded into the .CR2 file, but the RAW data itself is not affected in any way.
The interpretation of the RAW data, as captured within the JPG preview, exhibits the picture style characteristics selected, including sharpening amounts.

Realize that Picture Styles are all in-camera postprocessing, used only to create a JPG file -- whether that JPG is the only thing that is stored, or if that JPG is used within the .CR2 preview image that the camera displays when you press Play even for RAW-only file capture. Since it is postprocessing (in camera) it still does not alter RAW data, per se.

The analogy to film photography...the RAW is the negative, the Picture Style is the manner in which the Print is made (with more/less contrast, with full sharpness or with detail reduction)...and the Print (or the instructions -- Picture Style -- on how to make the print) never changes the negative!