The first picture, here on the left, was taken with at f32 (a very small aperture)...and required over 1 full second to compose (absolutely must have a tripod for long exposures like that!). Everything is clearly sharp from foreground to background. The second picture, was shot at f2.8 at 1/100 second. Taking a photo with a wide open aperture like this results in much more light being let in, therefore, a very shallow depth of field...blurring everything but the focal point, which, in this case, is that front cross.
I want to stress, again, that neither of these choices is right or wrong...it is simply a personal, creative choice and should have a lot to do with your subject matter, the available light you have to work with, and the end result you are looking for.
In this case, with such a compelling subject matter, both depth of field choices are particularly valid. Nicely done Buck!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/648da/648dacdefe9ae9ef571876510582052944713d17" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/726df/726dfc9b2ad8930668edfa470ae5feedddefff2d" alt=""
No comments:
Post a Comment