my favourite photos Window Shopping in Korea

A portrait study in famous upmarket shopping area in Myeong-Dong,

South Korea.

Perfect DOF! Beautiful daughters!

Thanks Jayme.

It's a nice photo with very good DOF and very nice subjects. But I do have to find fault with the jackets. The commercial trademark is so prominent I find myself feeling as if I'm being slapped with a Burberry jacket. It seems that the jackets were designed to be showed off. But to my eyes, the checks have become the centre of focus of the picture rather than the faces of the subjects. If you wanted to shoot a Burberry commerical, I guess that would be fine. But I'm guessing that was not your intent.

Stanley, the jackets has been worn so often that my kids don't even realise the branding. It's light, cool and keeps them warm enough in cold weather without feeling too heavy. So we don't regard the brand as seriously as you do. Wouldn't make a difference if it's from K'mart.

expertly managed dof.

Beautiful girls, Alec!

[ Z. Appreciate your comment but which part don't you like? Show me some of yours?

I don't get this string. How can this not be an excellent photograph? Great DOF, happy girls, with beautiful smiles, relaxed and spontaneous. Fake? its all fake, its a photograph. You don't get DOF like that with your eyes. DOF is created. Please. If I recognize the brand of the girls' earrings, is it blatanty capitalsistic? Sorry to get upset on your photograph comments, Mr. Ee, but it seems so easy for some to be hypercritical of minutia.

Jeff, excellent rebuttal! Couldn't have done better myself. I tend not to take negative criticism seriously, after all, many of them do not have images in their site or are just not worth rating. However I do value very much genuine criticism. We are after all here to share and improve.

Bailey, why don't you be more specific in your comments? You're right, it does look unnatural on close inspection, but in snapshot size, no one will notice or care. Alec, look closely at the top of the head on the right and on the sleeve on the left. If this had been shot on a 35mm sized image sensor, a small aperture would have given you a range of sharp to blurry, near to far, but here, it's too abrupt and the artifacts are a distraction to nitpickers like us.

 

Other than that, the pose is nice, the lighting is good, and the composition is OK (although the red area pulls the eye a bit.)

Yes, I know that, but you haven't addressed my point, as usual.

 

(edit . . . if you consider 4x6 a snap shot, the medium view is larger.)

I have been meaning for a while to add a digicam to my collection.. despite the limitations, there are some undeniable advantages for instance the extra DOF at every equallent focal length. And the high subject magnification without incurring perspection compression and not to mention the all-star, super fast lens. Pity that the good digicams as the one Alec uses are too expensive :(

Vikram, you have a Canon 300D Rebel with a CMOS equivalent to the 10D. I am considering trading up to a the 300D or the new Nikon D70 instead of using the prosumer Sony F717. How can it be better than a DSLR with interchangeable lenses? Of course I'm not trying to belittle my faithful camera which has provided me great photos over the years. I must admit it is very convenient not having to clean the CCD like in DSLR and the swivel lenses make it a dream camera in crowded places. I consider it a great camera for daily use but for large format prints 13" X 19" I have to consider the higher 8mb DSLR cameras available today.

Hello Alec.. Sorry I never make myself clear.. I didn't mean the digicam sensor is better than dslr.. or vise verse. However they do deliver a different flavor that is missing in the DSLR..

 

 

If you are interested here is my list..

 

 

1. Firstly the DOF issue.. Where the dslr sometimes give u too little, the digicam gives you too much.. In situations where u need lot's of DOF?? (landscapes etc) stopping a dslr lens higher than f16 starts to make soft images. This is an inescapable fact with dSLRs. Af f32 most consumer lenses become too soft. (due to defraction) However where the aperture has a linear relationship with DOF the focal length has an inverse square relationship.. with a 7mm focal-length and the small digicam sensor, good hyperfocal distances can be achieved at small f-stops. Even at f8 a 7mm lens gives four times the DOF than a dslr at 28mm@f32. And guess which image will be sharper..

 

 

Secondly.. perspective compression caused by big lenses is sometimes great! But what if I didn't want the compress the distance between my subject and the background? If I use a focal length higher than 50, perspective compression is unavoidable, at 200mm (on DSLR) the distance b/w subject and background appears 4 times compressed.. at 300mm the background is sometimes sitting on top of my subject!! with digicams like (sony) I can get 200mm without the compression.. and panasonic with leica lens I can get 340 at the normal perspective.

 

One more, try handholding a 200mm or 300mm lens in bad light?? (exp: 1/50-1/80) digicams give the same eq field of view at 50mm or 1/50'th of a second exposure time.

 

I'm only saying, having both gives a little bit more control than having either. I don't think u should get rid of ur sony after u get the D70.. (forget the rebel)

 

[ Z and Carl Root. I respect both your comment s on the DOF of this image and that it looks not as natural as the perspective compression from a longer lens in an SLR camera. But the point is I am using a prosumer camera to get this quality. I am taking this camera to it's limit and believe you should critique it from the limitations that the camera has. Learning is making the best use of what you have. Let the simple guys with their basic equipment improve. I am trying to share ideas of what can be done. Is that wrong or do we all need to invest in the best to be fully acknowledged and appreciated?

Vikram Bose-Mullick

 

Thanks for your very insightful review of DOF in both prosumer and DSLR cameras. I am aware of that having used the Contax system before switching to digital 6 years ago. I actually graduated to F717 from the F505V. Even though F505V provides 3.3mb at highest resolution I find it in a class of it's own. I currently use it as my second camera with a wideangle attachment for creative shots. (See sample image). I am still extremely happy with my equipment and will continue to use it even if I were to get the Nikon D70.

[ Z OK So it's noticeable. I agree but it's actually taken by the F505V 3.3mb output. You rated some of my recent Parrot images especially the image titled "Hello" Is the DOF bad too? What about the "Parakeets"? Those are shot with the F717.

Accepting and working with the limitations of your equipment is part of the skill set. You could take issue with the statement that it doesn't look 'natural', meaning like a more traditional camera capture (who says 35mm DOF needs to be the standard?)

 

What gets confusing is when the PS work becomes critical to the finished product and then isn't executed perfectly. Do we comment on that? I would think so, since it's part of the final product.

 

I didn't check to see what you shot with, I just saw a curious DOF separation and then noticed some distracting artifacts.

 

When I bought my F5, I thought it would be the perfect camera for everything. It isn't, and if I didn't have two kids to put through college at the moment, I'd have different systems for different purposes, just like the pros. That's what it takes to get 'professional' results.

How true. Don't we all face similar problems on investment for our passion? A difficult balancing act for many of us I believe. Thanks for taking the time to comment Carl. You have an awesome portfolio.

How true! I respect your critique and will aim for higher excellence.

Now see what a little explination would save in time and trouble Z?

 

This has been an incredibly beneficial conversation for the photographer and the viewer and it certainly isn't because of some rating.

 

Well thought out comments are what help us improve and if we are here for the gain of our skills and to aid others in this pursuit, then what is more valuable - mass ratings or thoughtful critiques? I don't expect you to answer (at least not the question I posed.) You're answer at best will be something along the lines of a snide, "you won't force me to answer." line.

 

I hadn't noticed at first glance the DOF. It is a bit unnatural looking (whether 35mm, eye, or whatever.) Perhaps a tad less blur in PS. The subjects are well composed. Brand of clothing is a non-issue. I couldn't have told you the brand for a million dollars. Good tones. Well balanced and a decent job apart from the DOF.

The Burberry's stuff looks more fake than the blur to me...:o)... welcome to Asia!! but the smiles are very natural and nicely captured... welcome to Asia too!! Nice pic Alec!

C'mon kids. This is a nice photo. Appreciate it and don't pick it apart. Good color, DOF and pretty faces. Good work.

I've learned a lot and hopefully everyone who followed the thread link enjoyed it too. A cropped image from a low resolution image (in this case 1280X960) cannot take Gaussian Blur realistically in the background but a higher megapixel image can be adjusted to be more pleasant to the eye.