the blog of humanitarian, travel, and culture photographer Doug Klostermann
Canon has just announced a new model in their Rebel lineup of digital SLRs, the T2i or 550D. I encourage anyone who is just entering into digital SLR photography to have a look at my previous post Why You Shouldn’t Buy the Kit Lens before you simply buy the T2i kit without considering another lens that may be a better choice for you and your photography.
Antigua, Guatemala photo by dojoklo
There are many grim, depressing, disturbing, and disheartening photos of the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti, such as this series on The Big Picture. But today I came across a series of photos that show a different side of the conditions in Haiti. Photographer Alice Smeets had taken revealing photos of the lives of people and children in Haiti before the earthquake, and she recently returned to document the aftermath in this series of amazing photos. Although it is a relatively long slideshow, I encourage you to look at the entire series. The “life goes on” section in the middle is particularly wonderful. From a photographic standpoint, I was often struck by her amazing use of light – using the low, warm sun of morning or late afternoon, and often shooting into the sun to accentuate it.
photo by Alice Smeets retrieved from http://blog.zdf.de/3sat.Kulturtube/2010/01/hoffnung-in-haiti.html
Documentary photographer Robert Coles wrote “Who we are, to some variable extent, determines what we notice and…what we regard as worthy of notice, what we find significant.” It is obvious from Smeets’ series of Haiti photos that what she regards as worthy of notice differs greatly from many of the photographers working in Haiti and/ or their photo editors at home. She communicates a much more human and hopeful perspective of the situation. All the photos from Haiti show a view of the reality there, but which one is more worth focusing on?
I just learned that I’ve accomplished one of my photography goals: to have my photo on the cover of a travel guide book! My photo of the Inca King at Inti Raymi was selected to be on the cover of the Viva Travel Guide Cusco and Machu Picchu guide book. As their website explains,
“V!VA Travel Guides is a web-based community intent on collecting and sharing the most up-to-date travel info available. Essays, reviews and ratings submitted by travelers are available both online and in published travel guidebooks.”
Inca King at Inti Raymi – Sacsayhuaman, Cusco, Peru 2007
f/5 – 1/800 – 18mm
The guidebooks, if I recall correctly, were originally only available as downloads due to them being updated so regularly. They are now offered as printed guides in paperback as well as some e-books, but are still updated frequently. They cover numerous South American countries including Peru, Columbia, and Ecuador, and they are soon branching out into Central America. You can buy the guides on their website, on Amazon, or in bookstores like Borders and Barnes and Noble. The Cusco and Machu Picchu guide with my cover photo will be released in October 2010.
If you ever attend Inti Raymi, (in the paid bleacher seats) be prepared at the end of the ceremony to go onto the field and get some quick close-up photos of the participants (and I mean close – note the 18mm focal length!) as they parade out of Sacsayhuaman. At least we were able to do that a couple years ago, when I was lucky enough to capture this dramatic shot. This was the guy who, through sheer force of will, invoked the clouds to part and the sun to shine down on us, stunning the entire crowd (which included Bill Gates that year).
I’ve noticed that a lot of searches regarding depth of field have led to my blog, and I’ve also received some good follow up questions about it. Unfortunately, my post on Mastering Depth of Field may be a bit advanced for those who are still learning about how to use their digital SLR, as it is intended for more experienced photographers.
As I explained in that post:
“depth of field is…the range of distances in which the objects in the photograph will be acceptably sharp. For example, if I am using a 100mm lens, set my aperture at f/5.6, and focus on a subject 10 feet away, everything from 9.69′ to 10.3′ away from me will be acceptably sharp or in focus in the resulting image.”
Open Windows, San Miguel Duenas, Guatemala
Depth of field, then, can mean that everything is in focus from a few feet away to infinity (deep depth of field), or it can mean that a person’s eyes and nose are in focus, but their ears and hair and everything behind (and in front) of them is blurry (shallow depth of field). One of the best ways to make use of depth of field is to create dramatic, shallow depth of field – the subject is in focus, but the background is blurry. This technique helps to call attention to your intended subject and minimize distracting background elements, and to make your photos look much, much more like those of the pros.
All of the numbers and fractions and settings and seemingly reverse logic are intimidating at first, and most books add to the complication and confusion. But it is really quite simple. Depth of field is controlled by the aperture. A small aperture size (which is a larger aperture number like f/16 or f/22) will create deep depth of field, with everything in focus. A large aperture size (which is a smaller aperture number like f/2.8 or f/4) will create a shallow, dramatic depth of field. So here is the quick and simple way to create dramatic depth of field:
Open Windows, San Miguel Duenas, Guatemala
Set your camera on Aperture Priority Mode. On a Canon, rotate the mode dial to Av.
Set your camera to Auto ISO. Or else if you wish to control the ISO, if you are indoors or in dim light, set it to 800 or 1600 ISO. If you are outside in bright sun, set it to 100 ISO. If it is a bit cloudy, set it to 200 or 400 ISO.
Look in you manual for how to change the aperture setting. For a Canon dSLR in Av mode, that means rotate the dial up there by the shutter button. Turn the dial until you see f/2.8 or f/4 on your screen or in the viewfinder. Since you are in Aperture Priority Mode, the camera automatically selects an appropriate shutter speed. If you’ve selected the ISO yourself, or even if you are using Auto ISO, you may want to verify that an appropriate shutter speed is being selected. For example, I found that with the Canon 7D, Auto ISO often selects a much slower shutter speed than what is best for a situation. Press the shutter button half way down and check the shutter speed. If it is anywhere from 1/100 to 1/250, you are fine if your subject isn’t moving. If the subject is moving, make sure the shutter speed is 1/250 to 1/1000. If it is any higher or lower than the range you want, you should adjust the ISO until it falls into that range.
Focus on your subject using the focus mode of your choice, and take the photo. Preferably, use single point focus mode and select the focus point you want, so that you have complete control over where the camera focuses. If the subject is a person or animal, focus on the eyes or eyebrows. If it is something else, focus on what you want to be sharpest in the photo.
Let me know how the photos come out! Note in the first photo above that dramatic depth of field can be used to make the foreground blurry as well, not just the background.
I’ve recently discovered the excellent book Blue Planet Run, which I came across after seeing photographer Rick Smolan’s TED lecture. He’s the guy behind the “Day in the Life” series of photo books that were so ubiquitous awhile ago. Anyway, Blue Planet Run is a book he created, full of amazing photos, statistics, and essays about the worldwide water crisis. It was originally offered as a free e-book, and after a little hunting around, I found a pdf copy of it to download on RapidShare. It seems to be virus free and is definitely worth having a look at, either in hard copy or e-version.
The National Press Photographers Association (NPPA), “a professional society that promotes the highest standards in visual journalism,” has a code of ethics that all members are required to endorse. Whether or not you are a member, I think that they are excellent guidelines for any photographer working in the field, documenting people and humanitarian situations.
Campo Nuevo, Jalapa, Guatemala
While they appear to be common sense principles, they need to be listed and occasionally reviewed because they are sometimes challenging. For example, the first one is “Be accurate and comprehensive in the representation of subjects.” As anyone using high-speed continuous shooting mode knows, a facial expression can change in a split second, and the difference in the resulting images can be dramatic. They may tell completely different stories or give opposing impressions of the subject. There are many other examples of how composition, point of view, and time can change the perceived reality of an image. Which representation is most accurate? The photographer must act as an editor and decide based on all they know about the subject and the situation.
San Miguel Duenas, Guatemala
The third one is equaling challenging. It reads, in part, “Avoid stereotyping individuals and groups. Recognize and work to avoid presenting one’s own biases in the work.” Of course a humanitarian photographer in the field doesn’t want to turn the subject into a stereotype, but in many ways they are working against a lifetime of education and image viewing. As I discussed in my previous “Exotic vs. Real” post, those in the developed world grow up learning to see the developing world and its people as exotic and colorful, but this is often far from the reality. A photographer cannot simply decide to portray a subject without bias and preconceived ideas, but he or she must dedicate themself to learning as much as they can about the subject, their life, culture, and situation. Cultural biases are so deeply embedded one often does not even realize they are there and simply assumes all other humans think and feel the same way. For example, in a classroom when a student gives the wrong answer, a teacher often asks another student to correct them and give the right answer. In certain cultures this action is deeply offensive and insulting, and would never be done by a teacher. It is impossible to know and understand how those in another culture think – expats living a foreign country for years will verify this. But one must make the effort to learn as much as they can about the cultures they work in, and to recognize the multitude of biases they carry with them.
San Antonio Aguas Calientes, Guatemala
The third standard also says “Be complete and provide context when photographing or recording subjects.” In addition to the numerous layers of meaning and importance this has as an ethical guideline, this is also an excellent compositional guideline. Show the context of the subject and the environment around them. This is why photojournalists often work with a wide angle lens such as a 16-35mm. By doing this, the photograph gives a more complete story of the subject, and it often makes for a more interesting composition.
San Miguel Duenas, Guatemala
The fourth guideline has been a subject of discussion in the media in response to the images being shown from the earthquake in Haiti. “Treat all subjects with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable subjects and compassion to victims of crime or tragedy. Intrude on private moments of grief only when the public has an overriding and justifiable need to see.” Images of dead and unclothed bodies have been prominently shown in newspapers and websites, and have offended some viewers. The Public Editor of the New York Times gave an excellent response and defense to this controversy in this article. One of his responses, which I have often read from other photographers and have experienced myself, is that the subjects very often want the photos to be taken and to be seen. They want their story told, and they themselves have no method or channels for effectively telling their important story.
As far as treating subjects with respect and dignity, nearly all humanitarian photographers, including myself, speak these words in some form on their website. But what do they really mean, in the field? For me it means treating the subject with respect and dignity both in the interactions with them, and in the representations of them in the images. As I’ve written about before, it starts with not entering into a situation with the camera to your face, immediately snapping shots. The photographer should first introduce themself, talk with the subject, or communicate as best a possible. They should explain what they are doing and why. And even before that, as mentioned above, it means educating oneself in advance about the people and culture. It means trying to understand the situation from the subject’s point of view, and then striving to capture that visually. There are an infinite number of visual realities that can be taken of a subject and a situation, but it means capturing and presenting the one that both tells the story and celebrates the subject.
Campo Nuevo, Jalapa, Guatemala
The final NPPA ethical guideline that I will address here is the fifth one, “While photographing subjects do not intentionally contribute to, alter, or seek to alter or influence events.” There is a difference between photojournalism for the media and humanitarian photography for a client. A humanitarian photographer may be posing a subject in order to get a portrait or to show a certain component of a project. But that does not mean the humanitarian photographer cannot follow this guideline as well. I believe that in many situations, an unaltered, uninfluenced shot will make a more natural, and thus much stronger image. In my work I have found that it is often easy to disappear into a situation, and become the fly on the wall. While subjects may initially strut and pose for the camera, or begin to act self-consciously, if you just stay in place, and let a minute or two pass, they will begin to ignore you and forget you are there taking photos.
Open Windows, San Miguel Duenas, Guatemala
I encourage you to have a look at the other guidelines I have not discussed here and think about how they apply to your work.
In my previous post about starting out as a humanitarian photographer, I discussed how to go about creating, planning, and executing your own self-assignments, in order to gain experience in the field and begin to develop a portfolio of work. In this post I’d like to discuss some resources that can help you develop in a different way. An important part of being a humanitarian photographer is understanding what humanitarian aid organizations aim to do, the issues they address, and the people and populations they work with.
San Miguel Duenas, Guatemala photo by dojoklo
A great place to get a broad view of the important humanitarian issues in developing countries is the TED website, which presents a ongoing series of “riveting talks by remarkable people.” Each one I’ve watched has been interesting and enlightening, and they are worth searching through to find the topics that most interest you. Here are a few of my favorites that relate to humanitarian work:
Start with Hans Rosling’s “Best Stats You’ve Ever Seen.” Through his innovative, visual, and dramatic use of statistics, he begins to tear apart myths and preconceptions about the developing world. His other lectures on poverty, AIDS, and Asia are equally as interesting and worthwhile.
Bill Gate’s lecture on “Mosquitos, Malaria, and Education” gained notoriety in the media with his tactic of releasing of mosquitoes into the audience. Through his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, he is focusing his money, attention, and shrewd business sense to tackling some of the largest and most important humanitarian issues of today.
Paul Collier’s lecture on the “Bottom Billion” addresses the ways we can, and must, close the gap between the rich and poor.
Wade Davis is an anthropologist and ethnobiologist who has spent his career studying indigenous cultures. I highly recommend reading his books, including Light at the Edge of the World: A Journey Through the Realm of Vanishing Cultures. In it he celebrates and speaks to the importance of the fascinatingly diverse ways cultures have chosen to exist on this planet. In addition, the book contains stunning photos Davis has taken on his adventures around the globe. Some of these thoughts and photos are part of his lecture on “Endangered Cultures.”
There are many other lectures on these types of issues, so be sure to check out the links and suggested lectures after watching the ones I’ve listed. There are other lectures that aren’t directly related to humanitarian topics which are however very interesting and may help to expand your thinking.
Malcolm Gladwell is always helpful in shifting the way one thinks about things, and his talk on “Spaghetti Sauce” is very entertaining.
Robert Sapolsky, who spends a lot of time studying primates, has interesting and surprising insights into what does, and doesn’t make humans unique.
VS Ramachandran’s talks on the brain, including “The Neurons That Shaped Civilization” are also quite fascinating.
And finally, I can’t leave you without a photography related lecture. James Nachtwey’s “Searing Photos of War” will be an eye-opening and inspiring presentation for any aspiring photojournalist.
I have to warn you, watching one lecture typically leads to another, and they are quite addictive.
Check out LensFlare35.com for a great interview and narrated slideshow with humanitarian photographer Karl Grobl. He discusses how he started out, his experiences traveling and working in developing countries, and the stories behind some of his favorite photos.
Solola Market, Guatemala photo by dojoklo
190mm, f/4, subject distance 10m (image cropped)
OK, I admit, the title of this post is purposely overly dramatic. The truth is, I don’t know if you should buy a digital SLR with the kit lens or not. That was just a cheap ploy for attention and Google searches. But I’d like to raise some issues that can help you make a better, more informed decision if you should get the kit lens or if you should buy just the camera body, and purchase a different lens.
San Francisco, Peru
If some of the digital photography terms in this post are new to you, check out this great glossary for assistance.
There are several routes to follow regarding buying lenses. One common path seems to be to start out with a single, all purpose zoom lens, like an 18-135mm, that takes you all the way from wide angle to telephoto. Then when your experience and needs change and develop, you might get higher quality zooms with more limited range, including a wide angle zoom, a standard zoom, and a telephoto zoom. Somewhere along the way you may throw in a couple prime lenses, and then maybe upgrade the zoom lenses to the professional series, or get a super expensive, giant telephoto. There are a million sites that address everything about lenses, so I don’t wish to repeat it all here. But one thing to keep in mind is that you typically get what you pay for. With more expensive lenses you get better sharpness, higher quality build, larger maximum apertures, fixed maximum apertures, better durability and/ or weather resistance, higher quality auto focus mechanisms, image stabilization, etc. One notable exception to this rule seems to be Canon’s 50mm f/1.8 II for under $100. From what I’ve repeatedly read, the quality is exceptional, although the build quality seems to be what suffers.
If you are new to learning about lenses, you may wonder why you shouldn’t just buy an inexpensive lens that takes you from 18mm or 55mm all the way to 200mm or 300mm and covers all your needs. The general answer is that lenses typically can’t maintain high quality throughout a huge range like that. If you have a high quality camera, you are better off sacrificing some of that zoom range for better quality through a more limited range.
Ucayali River, Peru
So, to choose the lens that is right for you, first look at what you plan to or typically take photos off. What range of zoom or individual prime lenses best fit these needs? If you have lots of recent photos, look at the EXIF data to see what focal lengths got the most use. (Make sure you take into account sensor sizes and crop factors though. A photo taken at 55mm on your digital compact may not be the equivalent of 55mm on a not-full-frame Canon Rebel or 7D, or may not be the equivalent of 55mm on a full frame Canon 5D. You may have to research and figure out what the equivalent focal length is.)
When I was initially upgrading from an all purpose zoom to higher quality but more limited range zooms, I put all my favorite and most successful recent photos in a folder and then opened that folder in Adobe Bridge. In the “Filter” panel, I expanded the “Focal Length” list, and saw the number of photos taken at each focal length. It quickly became apparent that I was always working at the extremes of my lens, either at 28mm or at 105mm, and then the next highest concentration of images was around 50mm and 85mm. What this metadata told me was that I needed a wide angle lens for those times I was working at 28mm, and also a telephoto lens that started around 80mm and went up to 105mm or greater. Knowing from experience that I often wished I could get much wider than 28mm, and seeing in the EXIF data that when going wide I rarely went above 30mm or 35mm, I chose a 16-35mm wide angle zoom lens. Also knowing from experience that I often wished I could zoom in much closer than I was able to with 105mm, a 70-200mm lens was a great solution. With these two lenses, I have the wide and telephoto ranges covered. But the EXIF data also showed a concentration of images from 50-65mm, so this tells me perhaps I should consider a 50mm prime lens. I can make up the difference of 50-65mm by “zooming with my feet,” as they say.
Cusco, Peru
If you don’t yet have enough experience to know which range of lenses will best fit your subject matter, look at photographers who do similar work. Professionals usually list what gear they use on their website – look for the “equipment” link. If you are into travel, look at what Bob Krist and Nevada Wier use. If you are into landscapes or birds or sports, look at your favorite pros in these areas (sorry, I don’t know too much about these areas). If you favor international photo journalism, look to Karl Grobl and Ami Vitale, or any number of other working pros. If you can’t afford or are not ready to invest in the professional series lenses that they use, determine the closest equivalent in a less expensive lens.
There may be 2 or 3 lenses that fit in your desired range, so the next step is to head to the photo store. Have them pull out the camera body you have or want, and then 2 of the similar lenses. Try them both out, and you may quickly see which one you favor. One may be much heavier than the other, or just feel more comfortable in your hands. There may be a significant difference in size. When I went to look at the 70-200mm, there were 4 to choose from: it came with or without image stabilization and with f/2.8 or f/4 aperture. I knew I wanted the IS, and even though it was significantly more expensive, I knew I wanted the f/2.8 since it is generally considered better for a variety of reasons. However, the moment the guy placed them side by side on the counter, I was relieved I had not ordered it sight unseen. The f/2.8 is gigantic. It is a cannon, (not just a Canon) and it weighs a ton. I knew I would not want to haul that thing around, have it around my neck or in my hands all day, and that I would probably begin to dread its weight very quickly. So I went with the f/4, with its very similar optics and performance, and half the weight. I sacrificed a little “speed” and compositional possibilities (as well as bragging rights) with the f/4 aperture, but based on how I knew I would be using it, it was worth the trade off. However when comparing two similar wide angle zooms, side by side and in my hands, I chose the heavier one. Its shorter focal length at the wide end and its wider aperture, which would be beneficial in the low light situations I would be commonly using it, were more important to me that the weight.
Lake Titicaca, Peru
If you still can’t decide, rent the camera and both lenses, or just the lens you are leaning towards, and try them out for a weekend. As far as all the other comparisons between lenses, do research on-line. Avoid forums that debate the pros and cons of various lenses but are subject to subjective judgments. Look for sites with actual side-by-side reviews and comparisons. I’ve listed a few links at the bottom.
On a final note, I’ve read of people being concerned about buying lenses that overlap, for example having a 24-105mm and a 70-200mm. These 2 would overlap, and thus potentially serve the same purpose, in the 70-105mm range. I don’t think this should be a concern at all, for a couple reasons. First, the lenses may not act exactly the same optically at the same focal length due to the lenses’ minimum apertures or their focusing “sweet spots.” More importantly, there are so many situations where you can’t or don’t want to change, or even carry around a variety of lenses, so consider each lens’ range independently of your other lenses. If you were walking about in a city taking photos, a 24-105mm would be great range, and more convenient than having to change lenses every time you wanted to zoom past 70mm. Of course if you have 2 bodies, you may have to reconsider this philosophy.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/
http://www.dpreview.com/
http://photo.net/equipment/canon/
I recently came across an excellent website regarding depth of field (dof), including a handy online calculator for determining dof based on the focal length of the lens, the aperture, and distance from the subject. It even takes into account different sensor sizes, including the APS-C size sensor of the Canon 7D. You can also view and print dof tables as well as create, print, and assemble a field dof calculator based on focal lengths of your choosing. And if you have an iPhone, there is a handy dof calculator app.
Chichicastenango Market, Guatemala – 200mm, f/4, subject distance 2.7m
One figurine in focus, surrounding figurines dramatically out of focus – achieved by standing close, zooming way in and choosing wide aperture
Why is this all important? Well first, if you aren’t familiar with what depth of field is, it is the range of distances in which the objects in the photograph will be acceptably sharp. For example, if I am using a 100mm lens, set my aperture at f/5.6, and focus on a subject 10 feet away, everything from 9.69′ to 10.3′ away from me will be acceptably sharp or in focus in the resulting image. If none of this is clear to you, or only partially understood, then go out and read Bryan Peterson’s Understanding Exposure first, and then come back to rejoin us. It is a bit complicated and difficult at first, but if explained properly – as he will do better than I could – it will soon click. Also, I have posted a simplified explanation and quick and easy lesson for using dramatic depth of field here.
So, according to George Schaub in Using Your Digital Camera (I have no idea who this is, but borrowed the quote from the above website) “(Depth of field) is one of the most creative and profound effects available to photographers.” I absolutely agree with this. My photography improved 2000%, virtually overnight, when I understood and began to use the creative and visual power of dof. And this is why I shoot on Aperture Priority Mode (Av) 98.5% of the time.
I don’t want to go into the technical aspects of dof, and it can get extremely technical, but I will touch on some of the practical aspects of it. The ability to control dof is one of the many advantages of a digital SLR vs. a digital compact camera. Due to the small focal length, small sensor, and limited aperture sizes, a compact can typically not create the dramatic dof available to a dSLR user. And if one has a super-zoom type camera that will allow better use of dof, the controls to utilize it may be more cumbersome that with a dSLR.
Chichicastenango Market, Guatemala – 200mm, f/4, subject distance 7.4m (image cropped)
Man in focus, surrounding people slightly out of focus – achieved by being a few dozen feet away, zooming all the way in with 200mm, wide aperture
So why does one utilize dof? One reason is to better call attention to, or even isolate the intended subject of your photograph. When looking at an image, the eye tends to first go to what is sharply in focus as well as to what is lighter. If it is a busy scene with lots of possible subjects, the eye wanders aimlessly around all parts of the photo, and won’t necessarily focus on the subject you intended them to look at. By placing your intended subject in sharp focus, and the background and other elements out of focus to a lesser or greater degree, the viewer zeros in on what you intended them to. It can also be used to create various relationships between your subject and their environment or between your subject and other subjects in the frame. For example, a person who is your subject could be in sharp focus, while the background or elements around them are very much out of focus. This visually draws the subject out and leads the viewer to see this person as the sole subject of the photo. However, if the background or surrounding elements were just slightly out of focus, the viewer then sees the person as well as their surroundings, and starts to consider the relationships between them. By manipulating dof, you can work towards suggesting, defining and creating these types of relationships in your compositions.
San Miguel Duenas, Guatemala – 97mm, f/4, subject distance 3.3m
Girl in focus, boy and background environment (their home) slightly out of focus – achieved by standing a dozen feet away or so, zooming in to 97mm, wide aperture
And why does one need the dof calculators? Since dof varies so widely depending on the lens being used, the distance to the subject, and the aperture, it is difficult to know precisely what distance range is going to be in focus. One can use the dof preview button on the camera, but it is often difficult to determine through the viewfinder what the dof will be. So with the dof calculator, you can plug in various numbers and learn how a certain lens is going to act in a particular situation. Then, by using your lenses often, and experimenting with various apertures and various camera-to-subject distances, one can begin to get an intuitive feel for how each lens works, and how dramatically different a 16mm at f/4 aperture is from a 200mm at f/4 aperture. And when you are in a situation that allows it, you can pull out your iPhone or your field calculator, and determine a precise dof in advance.
Antigua, Guatemala – 127mm, f/5, subject distance 5.3m
Woman in focus, statue on distant church facade out of focus yet recognizable – achieved by standing a few dozen feet away, zooming in to 127mm, wide but not widest aperture
I like using a very wide aperture (like f/4 or f/5.6) to create very shallow, dramatic dof in many of my images. However, I typically don’t want it to be so shallow that a person’s nose is in focus and their ear is out of focus (though this is a dramatic and sometimes desired portrait “trick”). Also, when photographing action, such as dance, I want a little leeway so that if I focus on a hat instead of a face, or if the person moves forward a bit, there is a enough dof that their face will still be in focus. And this is why I originally began to search for depth of field tables, so I could better understand how my lenses were going to respond in certain situations.
Now, as a little, technical side note, I was always taught in school to be aware of the 1/3 – 2/3 rule which says that 1/3 of the in-focus area will be in front of the spot where you focus, and 2/3 will be behind it. So if you were standing at the front of a row of people, and turned back around to look down the line and take a photo, and focused on the 8th guy in line, this rule says that perhaps (due to your particular lens/ aperture/ distance choice) one person in front of him will be in focus too, and 2 people behind him will be. It turns out, this really isn’t accurate at all. Most often it is closer to 1/2 the distance in front of the focus spot and 1/2 behind it. I have no idea why they taught us 1/3 – 2/3.
|
Available at Blurb.com
