I'm wondering what you think about the narrow depth of field on this shot. Thanks!
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Does Narrow DOF Work On This Shot?
- Thread starter Woodyg3
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
I don't see why not. If you like it that's the ultimate test anyway. I think it looks good.
It is a nice photo, as is
Last edited:
It's unique and comp is very interesting. With the 3 stigma touching its head makes it behavioral which I love.
So I think the DOF works
So I think the DOF works
Sure, looks great to me!
MorganP
Well-known member
If you download the "DOF Calculator" Phone App and put in your numbers you will see that many times the Depth of field doesn't change much with close up shots from one f stop to another.
What I'm saying is your shot looks great and changing the f-stop, settings wouldn't have affect the photo that much.
What I'm saying is your shot looks great and changing the f-stop, settings wouldn't have affect the photo that much.
Yes. The point of interest is the flower with the hummingbird's head in it both of which are sharp. For me that is all that is required. The wings being very nicely out of focus impart the notion of movement without distracting from the main point of interest.
An excellent photo, IMO.
An excellent photo, IMO.
I must be learning. A couple of months ago I would have wanted a larger depth of field. Today I am completely in sync with those who say it is excellent and for the reasons they are saying so. While I agree that the 3 stigma on the head is a great reason, the one I like best is:
As an amateur, every thing I shoot is for my enjoyment. So Jeffries1 statement resonates deeply with me.
As an amateur, every thing I shoot is for my enjoyment. So Jeffries1 statement resonates deeply with me.
I like it!!!
Nice photograph
Hobbzz
Well-known member
Definitely. I shoot wide open pretty much 100% of the time. There are literally billions (maybe trillions) of wildlife photos of 100% of the subject in focus. The narrow dof makes this shot unique. Great work.
KirstyM
Well-known member
That’s a “yes” from me too!
That’s a beautiful shot, if I took that I would print it, frame it and hang it on a wall..
Turberticus
Well-known member
A yes from me. As long as the eye is in focus (or eyes), then I couldn't care less about the tail/wing/etc being slightly OOF.
Beautiful!
Both thumbs up from me.
It's great. There are other ways that it can be shot that would be great too. There's no right or wrong
Harry.G
Well-known member
YES the narrow depth of field works in my opinion
Harry.G
Harry.G
100%
Isaac Grant
Member
I am going to be the salmon on this one. I typically prefer to have most of the bird in sharp focus. I think it is an interesting shot but for me too much of the flower and bird is out of focus. The thing is that upping your F stop would have done little to nothing to help you. All that would really help was a different angle on the bird and flower. As an aside were you purposely trying to have blurred wings? I usually shoot my hummingbirds with a much higher shutter speed to freeze the action. You have plenty of shutter speed to play with as you could have just upped your ISO to get more shutter speed.
tclune
Well-known member
I am in sync with Isaac as far as I quoted. The OOF area is not particularly a problem, but that's because it isn't really relevant to the interesting part of the photo. I wonder whether a more aggressive crop around the in-focus part would have made a more compelling composition. But, whether it would or not, it's a great shot.
Here's the original question asked by Woody. "I'm wondering what you think about the narrow depth of field on this shot. Thanks!"
I have a feeling that Woody could have gotten all the sharpness he wanted on the wings if that was the goal.
Checking out some of Woodys other work I see excellent, sharp BIF images. One image of a herron in particular has water droplets frozen in motion beautifully highlighting the image. Woodys images show that he understands how to stop motion and freeze action so I have to believe he didn't want sharp wings distacting from the crisp birds head. The wings in this image are soft because they are behind the depth of field area.
Stopping down, not up, would make them sharper but they are also on two separate planes so the fstop and focus combination would have to be one that covered both planes and the head to get them sharp. I doubt any of that is what Woody was going for when he shot this image.
I'd enjoy hearing Woodys remarks. I could be totally wrong.
Add me to the list waiting to hear Woody's reply.
IMO it works well. What matters is in focus. There's nothing in the OOF area to distract attention. Nicely done.