wrought iron gates

[jann1033]

i wanted to get a series of wrought iron gates but even though i took them on the widest aperture my lens had( 3.5) the background through the fence is still to clean..any ideas how i could have blurred it more? should have used my 50mm 1.8 in hindsight but didn't really think i would need it at the time. would a different shutter speed cause more blur( know it causes motion blur but i mean background blur, with the wider ap would it change something?) i assumed it was wide ap for dof but maybe i needed a different shutter also????? could have upped the iso for faster or used the dreaded tripod if need be instead of the IS
this one is 1/60, f3.5, 200 iso, 28mm ( should have stood in the middle of the road and used the 50mm i guess ? )

even if i stood to the side and had the gate totally sharp, the background is focused more than i wanted ( not all that easy to focus on that little iron but..)...closeup to the side was the best but i wanted the full gates so that didn't really give me what i wanted. facing the gate was the worst and since it's other people's houses i couldn't mess with the actual gates. maybe i should have used manual focus????( which means with my mr magoo eyes everything would be out of focus )

any suggestions on how to do this next time? i wouldn't mind a little showing through but i wanted the different designs on the gates to be the thing that stood out and here not so much

this was in charleston sc, amazing what they do with this stuff,,, imo it's really an art form...to bad things don't work out how they look in my head

 

[manning]

28mm is the problem. The depth of field on that lens is almost forever.

As the mm on lenses go up the shallower the depth of field gets. That's why a 135mm is great for portraits.

 

[jann1033]

so then basically i would have had to cross the street ( looking both ways of course ) and wait for no cars...that would have been easy enough ( slaps hand to forehead) i will never learn

although now i am thinking...it would have upped the apeture to 5.6 ( 28-135 3.5-5.6 lens) so of my lens what should i have used? 50 mm 1.8, the 28-135 or would either the 70mm300 IS ( think that's 4.5-5.6) or the 70-200 f4l work the best here( still haven't decided which of those last 2 to get)? would the longer lens give me the same relative f stop blur even though the stop is actually less wide ?( would more length compensate for less width i guess i am asking)

thanks i'm marking this down so i don't forget ..

and btw, on another topic....this makes me appreciate this board so much..i asked this same question on a new forum.. dps( digital photography school i think it stands for) and the mod made a really smart mouth mean spirited post that was totally against the thread's rules ,had nothing to do with the question and made me feel like a piece of carp. i like their newletter but they have a really lousy forum imo if the mods are the ones who need to get censored.

so thanks to everyone here for putting up with my slow learning curve...

 

[mabas9395]

Not necessarily. One of the things that can impact bokeh (what they call the blurry background you are looking for) is the distance of the subject to the background compared to the distance from you to the subject. If you put on a 135mm lens and crossed the street so that you were 50ft away from your subject, the quality of your bokeh would be different if the background is five feet behind the gate or 100 feet behind the gate. It will be better the greater the distance.

Then again, if the background is 50ft behind the gate your bokeh would be different if you were five feet from the gate than if you were 100 feet from the gate. In this case, the smaller distance would give you the better effect.

So to sum it up, this is how things effect bokeh:

Apperture: larger f-stop (smaller number, like 1.8) = more background blurr
Focal Length: Longer lens = more background blurr
Camera to Subject distance: Closer you get = more background blurr
Subject to background: Farther back background is = more background blurr

One problem I have found is that focal length and camer to subject distance seem to work against each other. You put on a longer lens to get more blurr, but then you have to back up to fit everything in your shot and you get less blurr. I think that focal length has a bigger impact than distance but some of the more experienced folks around here can probably explain all of this better.

But as my avatar caption says, I know enough to be dangerous, not enough to dispense useful advice.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Camera to Subject distance: Closer you get = more background blurr
Subject to background: Farther back background is = more background blurr

This assumes that you want background blur and not forground blur. You can reverse these rules a bit when shooting through a fence. In those cases, you want to minimize the distance between you and the fence and maximize the distance between you and your subject. If you get the distances right and have a wide enough aperture, it is possible to blur a fence so much that it becomes practically invisble.

In the example below, I shot at 200mm and f/2.8 with the lens right up against the fence. There are parts of the fence in front of the lens, but they aren't really visible in front of the bird. They do rob the picture of a little sharpness, but at least you don't see a fence in front of the bird.

 

[ukcatfan]

This assumes that you want background blur and not forground blur. You can reverse these rules a bit when shooting through a fence.

I believe that in her example, the gate is the subject and she would not want it blurred at all.

Kevin

 

[manning]

Maybe this will help

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

 

[jann1033]

great link! thanks!

ok so after figuring out a bunch of those it would seem that as a generalization.,,, any lens i should use as wide open as i can for the least amount of dof and the longer the lens the less dof also and the closer i am the less depth of field( and still be far enough away so it's sharp)...so closest, longest , widest= smallest dof

so i should have used the 135mm on that lens and gotten as close i could and still get the whole fence( but no closer than 19 ft or so, which i was probably 10 ft away tops) and used the 5.6 aperture to get the fence sharp and the stuff behind it blurred , oui?

 

[Groucho]

When all else fails, you can always photoshop... duplicate the layer, and on the background layer, blur the photo to the level you want. Use the eraser on the top layer to reveal the parts you want in focus (or use an edge-detecting filter) - granted, this is a bad example as the fence would require a lot of painful edge work to make it look good, but for a more solid object, it's something to consider.

Doing it properly in the camera will almost certainly look better, though.

That's why I like carrying all my lenses. You never know which you'll need. The 50mm probably would have worked very well in this instance.

 

[jann1033]

When all else fails, you can always photoshop... duplicate the layer, and on the background layer, blur the photo to the level you want. Use the eraser on the top layer to reveal the parts you want in focus (or use an edge-detecting filter) - granted, this is a bad example as the fence would require a lot of painful edge work to make it look good, but for a more solid object, it's something to consider.

Doing it properly in the camera will almost certainly look better, though.

That's why I like carrying all my lenses. You never know which you'll need. The 50mm probably would have worked very well in this instance.

hmm since this is the most ornate one so maybe I'll try the photoshop and see if my patience gives out before i can finish one of the less ambitious ones ...guessing the patience...or lack there of.. will win but maybe if i take a lot of deep breaths and walk away a couple dozen times...
since I'm not really planning on returning to Charleston in the near future at least i could try it..

it could be some of those rolling coolers you see really contain all the dslr"stuff" no normal person could carry other wise just so they can be prepared...i might have to do that to next vacation

 

[mabas9395]

This might be a good time to add another lens to your wish list. I have the kit, 50mm f/1.8 and the 28-135mm IS, but a few months ago I got the 85mm f/1.8 and out of all my lenses, it does the best job and blurring the background. Just makes the subjects pop out. And at only about $350 its pretty nicely priced as far as canon lenses go.

 

[Gdad]

Maybe you could try them shooting at night with a flash and set up your shot so the backdrop is out of range of the strobe? Just a thought.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

One major difficulty you'll have with the composition of the fence shot is the angle. Depth of field falls off the further you are from the focal plane. The factors listed above (aperture, focal length, subject distance, and background distance) affect how quickly it falls off. To get the background significantly out of focus, you'll need a pretty narrow depth of field. Because the fence is not parallel to the focal plane, you'll probably run into problems with either the left side or the right side of the fence being out of focus.

If you really want a narrow depth of field and you want your subject to be sharp, it's best to have all of your subject about the same distance from the camera. In the case of the fence, it would be best to stand in front of the middle of the fence and shoot directly at it. Of course, that might not make for a very nice composition. There are always tradeoffs.

 

[jann1033]

Maybe you could try them shooting at night with a flash and set up your shot so the backdrop is out of range of the strobe? Just a thought.

actually that might not be a bad idea since originallyif it had gone according to plan i wanted it black and white anyway

i was basically standing at an angle to keep as much background out as possible...i'll have to make a return trip..on the way home from wdw??? ( or find someplace else with tons of wrought iron)

 

[ukcatfan]

i'll have to make a return trip..on the way home from wdw??? ( or find someplace else with tons of wrought iron)

New Orleans is a nice place, but that is way out of your way going back to Ohio.

Kevin

 

[0bli0]

at the distance you are from the gate @ 28mm will, as you've discovered, result in quite a bit of DOF. as has been suggested, you can go longer (although your aperture will decrease on that particular lens - leaving you in the same boat).

you will probably have satisfactory results with your 50 1.8, but beware of shallow dof at the angle you're shooting - you may need to stop down to 2.2 or so.

you can also get closer with the 28-135 and concentrate on the gate's detail, instead of the entire gate.

 

[flowerfacade]

Jan,
Since you have been so helpful to me I will try to help you a little!
I am not advanced enough to give photo advice, but I can tell you that Philip Simmons is the blacksmith that all gatemakers aspire to be like. He is featured from time to time in our area because if his expertise. I have seen wonderful photographs of his gates. This exhibit (that I am sure you cannot go to) features his works along with a book of photos of the gates. It might be that you can look at the photos and see how the photographer set the picture up. Anyway, I will pass along the information to you. I have seen a few books at the library featuring his work and the pictures are great!
http://www.carolinaarts.com/206burroughschapin.html
Laura

 

[jann1033]

Jan,
Since you have been so helpful to me I will try to help you a little!
I am not advanced enough to give photo advice, but I can tell you that Philip Simmons is the blacksmith that all gatemakers aspire to be like. He is featured from time to time in our area because if his expertise. I have seen wonderful photographs of his gates. This exhibit (that I am sure you cannot go to) features his works along with a book of photos of the gates. It might be that you can look at the photos and see how the photographer set the picture up. Anyway, I will pass along the information to you. I have seen a few books at the library featuring his work and the pictures are great!
http://www.carolinaarts.com/206burroughschapin.html
Laura

thanks Laura...not sure if any i saw were his but who ever did them they are imo a true artist! There is a tour you can take that points out Mr Simmons work but we didn't have time...husband would love to move to your area so maybe we'll be back and can take it then. Thanks again
edited cause.
i just ordered a book about him from amazon so hopefully it will have a few pictures also... used, for $6 is cheaper than a return trip to charleston although not as much fun

btw totally ot but do you have any idea what this building is or where i could get information about it...it looks like maybe an old theatre ( peaked in the doors)? it is on one of the main roads that you take to get to the historic district I think it is east bay. thanks

 

[DueyDooDah]

One other item, which I did not see mentioned (I skimmed,though). You shot this image using shutter priority. If you change it to aperture priority, you can then open the lens as far as it can go and let the shutter do it's thing.

 

[jann1033]

thanks! lots of good suggestions for next time i added to my book