depth and vantage point.

  • Thread starter Thread starter anObsession
  • Start date Start date
A

anObsession

Guest
can anyone explain in basic terms what they mean?

especially vantage point...

Or if anyone knows the 'line' one too??

Thanks
 
I presume you mean depth of field for the first one?

It's the amount in sharp focus in the shot.

Imagine there's a mate of yours stood in front of a mountain. At f2.8 on a 50mm lens (assuming you're focussing on your mate), your mate will be sharply in focus but the mountain will be blurred as it's out of focus - that is the depth of field isn't deep enough to have both in sharp focus.

Now switch the f-stop to f22, and although you're still focussing on your mate the mountain will be sharp too - so the depth of field is now deep enough (long enough even) to cover both

A vantage point is simply where you're stood to take the shot

HTH?
 
Ohh thanks that helped loads!! i didnt really understand what this sheet was telling me lol.

Thanks again :)
 
W.Smith said:
Now you only got the line left to worry about.
Click to expand...


I didn't even notice that one until this post :D

Line means... not a clue :shrug::shrug::shrug: - type in the sentence and we may be able to have a stab at it
 
Here's one

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
 
Throw away (or sell) all your zoom lenses and buy a fixed focal length one. That way you can move around to find the best vantage point and at the same time look for the line that the viewers eye will be taken along in your final print.

James
 
Good idea, if I get rid of my 3 zooms I can then set about replacing a 12 - 200 range (much of which I use not just to move in & out but for the characteristics of the chosen length) with... just how many would it take? 10 to be safe?

Then for all those occasions when I can't move easily or swiftly enough I can always crop into the shot; or of course just miss it

2nd thoughts, I'll stick with my zooms thanks :D

As for line... you're taking it to mean lead-in line then? Could be, perhaps he'll come back and post the sentence so we can see - intriguing eh :thinking:
 
Dear Dave,

Of course you're quite right, one does wonder though how some of the photographers from years gone by managed to get the images they did, I'm thinking of Andre Kertesz and Henri Cartier Bresson in particular.

James

Oh and Jacques Lartigue you may have seen the programme about him the other night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top