DOF

[toonamp]

I keep reading comments about photographs where people say "great dof"

I know what depth of field is. (I think )

It's the part of the photo that is in focus.

Depending on the type of photograph dof is going to be large or small.

What I don't understand is how, when I look at the very many photos that people have been saying "Great dof", apart from the front of the insect/flower/animal/ object all the rest is blatantly out of focus, in fact there is very little depth of field. :shake:

Obviously I'm missing something, could someone please enlighten me

 

[dazzajl]

I don't get it either. I normally take it to mean great use of depth of field.

After all, as you say every single shot ever has DoF. :shrug:

 

[BRASH]

Thats kinda the idea. To have the centre of attention in focus and the rest out. The out of focus bg is called bokeh. It obviously doesn't work for every composition but in Macro there tends to be a shallow dof because of the nature of the set up.

 

[toonamp]

Does any body really set out to take a photo of say a bird, and have its tail, back and feet out of focus?

Or a flower that only has the closest petals sharp, and the rest a blur?

I can understand in an artistic presentation mind but in general photography I thought the aim was clarity in most cases.

 

[toonamp]

Thats kinda the idea. To have the centre of attention in focus and the rest out. The out of focus bg is called bokeh. It obviously doesn't work for every composition but in Macro there tends to be a shallow dof because of the nature of the set up.

The whole of the bird in focus and the background out of focus, unobtrusive.

Not just the birds face in focus


Aha You edited

 

[BRASH]

Does any body really set out to take a photo of say a bird, and have its tail, back and feet out of focus?

Or a flower that only has the closest petals sharp, and the rest a blur?

I can understand in an artistic presentation mind but in general photography I thought the aim was clarity in most cases.

Yes, people do set out to take pictures that way. Clarity in most cases is not always the best way, or even seldom the best way to present a photograph. Obviously it depends on the subject matter is. The oof area can really make the in focus areas pop out.

 

[fletch5]

i use it to describe a situation where the depth of focus has been used well to isolate subjects from the background, or where everything is in good focus. as for flower and insect shots, the dof on such a short range is bout the same as the thickness of paper, and to get soo much in focus is an art form in itself.

 

[BRASH]

i use it to describe a situation where the depth of focus has been used well to isolate subjects from the background, or where everything is in good focus. as for flower and insect shots, the dof on such a short range is bout the same as the thickness of paper, and to get soo much in focus is an art form in itself.

 

[toonamp]

i use it to describe a situation where the depth of focus has been used well to isolate subjects from the background, or where everything is in good focus. as for flower and insect shots, the dof on such a short range is bout the same as the thickness of paper, and to get soo much in focus is an art form in itself.

Yes I agree entirely, and with true macro shots the dof is going to be shallow at times.

 

[4hero]

One of my shots from yesterday. My aim was to make the moths eyes the purpose of the shot. If this was shot with my 100mm macro, the DOF would have been much less (or is that much more ), and would not have given as much emphasis to the eyes.



I'm crap at describing things, forgive me please

 

[toonamp]

I understand exactly what your saying, and from your shot, it's pretty obvious what your aim was, to draw attention to the eyes.

As I put it simply before, if the subject is a bird
"The whole of the bird in focus and the background out of focus, unobtrusive."

If its a portrait the whole of the persons face/head in focus, ( not just the nose. )
and the bckground out, unless it's relevent to the portrait etc
There just seem to be many posts were people are saying it's great dof, or even as Dazzajl said " Great use of dof " when it's just out of focus .