In My Eyes

The eye of my doughter looking at my son reading

Really good that sharp reflection in the eye. I like it.

Very beautiful image. Congrats!

You really have gotten it to the perfertion. Congrats!

Excellent!!!!

grfeat shot,, very precise

This is an amazing work of precise focusing and excellent lighting. Very inspiring. Congratulations. Karl

Pause and ponder!

such a great idea and so beautiful photo

Excellent idea and framing.

excellent idea and what a very sharp image!

Very creative. Very artistic. Congratulations.

 

Liz

Wonderful work. Truly wonderful.

 

--Lannie

Please note the following:

• This image has been selected for discussion. It is not necessarily the "best" picture the Elves have seen this week, nor is it a contest.
• Discussion of photo.net policy, including the choice of Photograph of the Week should not take place here, but in the Help & Questions Forum.
• The About Photograph of the Week page tells you more about this feature of photo.net.
• Before writing a contribution to this thread, please consider our reason for having this forum: to help people learn about photography. Visitors have browsed the gallery, found a few striking images and want to know things like why is it a good picture, why does it work? Or, indeed, why doesn't it work, or how could it be improved? Try to answer such questions with your contribution.

This photogragh or montage reminds me of what we would do at weddings some times, like double exposeing the bride & groom on a champaine bottle label. Kind of a trick if you will. aaahh Bill Stockwell.

I find the nose on the main subject to be too far out of focus. I would suggest cropping it away making a square format. It might need a little cut from the other side to achieve the square. Other than that, I find it a nice picture with great sharpness of the eye and the subject within. Well done, but you might try the same effect with a straight on approach where you have a flatter image to shoot. Never the less an interesting photograph.

Willie the Cropper

Interesting... Could we perhaps see this picture before the Photoshop blurring...?

Hmmmm.... Or is this perhaps original depth-of-field...?

Besides the technicalities, subject matter, composition and reflection are gorgeous...

"This photogragh or montage reminds me of what we would do at weddings some times, like double exposeing the bride & groom on a champaine bottle label."

Bohamdan says no, no Photoshopping under "Details": "one picture no PS been used effects on the reflection."

How is this possible, given the shallow DOF? I think that it must have to do with the convex shape of the eyeball, which perhaps allows the DOF to be greater in the reflection. Whether that is true or not, it is certainly the case that, if the eye had been a flat reflective surface (like that of a pool), then one would have had to choose to have either the eyelashes in focus, or the reflection, but not both.

Great work, Bohamdan.

--Lannie

Why might the convex shape of the eyeball allow the DOF to be greater in the reflection?

A convex reflective surface gives a wide angle effect with a corresponding effectively shorter focal length in the area viewed or captured through the reflection, thereby giving a higher effective f-stop (longer DOF) to the area captured in the reflection.

Again, this is not so with flat surfaces.

--Lannie

One last point is that convex lenses magnify, but convex reflective surfaces do the opposite.

Concave reflective surfaces (such as telescope mirrors), in comparison with convex reflective surfaces, give the opposite effect: magnification due to the greater focal length and a correspondingly higher f-stop, thus giving a shorter DOF.

That is, convex reflective surfaces (think "wide angle") give a longer DOF, but concave reflective surfaces (think "telephoto") give a shorter DOF.

As for me, I can only say that, with regard to optics, some things can be seen a posteriori or empirically (by observation) and some can be seen a priori (mathematically, by definition), but almost never does anything that happens in optics seem intuitively obvious to me.

Thanks for directing us to think about optics, Bohamdan. We are photographers and we deal with light and glass, but we all too often forget to consider optical effects when we are analyzing photographs.

Effectively, Bohamdan, you have worked with two "lenses" in the same shot (and I am not talking about the lens in the pupil), one the lens on your camera and the other the de facto lens of the curved reflective surface.

I do hope that the elves or moderators will view these technical considerations to be germane in this case, and not view them as an attempt to hijack the thread. This is not the kind of technical problem that most of us face every day, but I am glad to see this one come around on a Photo of the Week.

Congratulations again, Bohamdan. You have done more than please our eyes. You have forced us to think.

--Lannie

Shots like this, usually, are more sensual in the sense that the image is all about the subject's beauty. But as soon as we see the reflection, the object which the subject is gazing at, the whole idea of the photograph shifts into a completely different area. I think that's an amazing twist that makes this shot so much different and so much better than other eye closeups.

This photo does not tell anything about doughter and son. It tells something about author maybe. I have to say that people think about a smile of the women for five hundred years.

I find this shot appealing not just because of the meaning being conveyed, but because of the way it's being conveyed. 'In me eyes' (or as it stands 'in my eye') is a great example of photographical perception of the world and portraiture. Almost like a three way mirror the image of her son studying is captured by her daughter's eye and in turn by her through the lens, yet throughout each reflection the clarity remains. The photographer has captured both her children with a singular capture of the eye, so perhaps her title is representative of HER eyes rather than her daughter's eye. In any case this is very well and originally composed.