Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:20 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:43 am 
G’day to all??
When I was looking at these photos I was so amaze! Can any body please tell me how these pictures are nice and matt? I can understand the composition but can’t understand how it’s processed? it is Post Processing or some other technique?
As these are NOT my photos I will only post the link for reference
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Pictures/Picture.aspx?Picture=2005-02-05_15-58-21

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Pictures/Picture.aspx?Picture=2010-01-23_15-02-11-01

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Pictures/Picture.aspx?Picture=2005-03-13_13-54-48-02

Nalin


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:51 am 
By the looks of them, and looking at the details, they have been taken by very long focal length lenses at bright apertures to create the bokeh. Is that what you mean?


Top
  
 
 Post subject: matt
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:59 am 
jeremy1302 wrote:
By the looks of them, and looking at the details, they have been taken by very long focal length lenses at bright apertures to create the bokeh. Is that what you mean?


Yes kind of, but the entire image’s are matt! Am I right? All most of my images are glossy


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 6009
Location: The Netherlands
That's easy, just buy these 2 lenses, and go hunt birds:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... _2_8L.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... _4_0L.html

I don't see any difference between matte and glossy images, really?

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8042
Location: UK
I don't think I get the matt reference in this context - it would help to provide examples of something similar that isn't matt to compare against.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:52 pm 
Citruspers wrote:
That's easy, just buy these 2 lenses, and go hunt birds:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... _2_8L.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... _4_0L.html

I don't see any difference between matte and glossy images, really?


Thanks for sharing the information! So this is because of the large aperture and focal length? :twisted:
It’s bit difficult to find a budget for either of them! So expensive but give out great photos……. damn!
:(
So if I cant afford it can I at least I can do PP? :idea:


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:24 pm 
nalinfernando wrote:
Citruspers wrote:
That's easy, just buy these 2 lenses, and go hunt birds:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... _2_8L.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... _4_0L.html

I don't see any difference between matte and glossy images, really?


Thanks for sharing the information! So this is because of the large aperture and focal length? :twisted:
It’s bit difficult to find a budget for either of them! So expensive but give out great photos……. damn!
:(
So if I cant afford it can I at least I can do PP? :idea:


Yes, I use a free program called GIMP.

There are a few things you could do, but simply, select the background of the images carefully, feather it a few pixels, and then apply a gaussian blur.

Yes this is a crude method, especially when your background fades away


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8042
Location: UK
If the blurred out background is all you want, you don't need those expensive lenses.

example 1 example 2 example 3

Those were taken with the 100-400 f/5.6 lens. Even on a tight budget, you can still get that effect with a regular 300mm zoom lens. They key is to get close to the subject, where the longer lenses makes it easier.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Great Info
PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:57 am 
popo wrote:
If the blurred out background is all you want, you don't need those expensive lenses.

example 1 example 2 example 3

Those were taken with the 100-400 f/5.6 lens. Even on a tight budget, you can still get that effect with a regular 300mm zoom lens. They key is to get close to the subject, where the longer lenses makes it easier.


Popo you nailed my question which was not properly put together sorry. Thanks for the information I thought that you need to have a very small aperture F2.8 to get such images plus PP thanks again Popo this will help me a great deal! Nalin


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 8:28 am 
Actually, two of the three pictures in the opening post were taken at F8... Only the very first one was on F2.8 - to me, it would seem that the aperture is not such a limiting factor.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 8:49 am 
It depends on the focal length. At 400mm, there will still be significant bokeh even stopped down to f8. At a focal length like 50mm or 85mm, you will need a wider aperture to get the results (like f2.8)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:49 pm 
... nokia n70 (as you can see in exif)
(2.8 mp?) + binoculars :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Image


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 5:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:23 pm
Posts: 827
Location: Boca Raton, FL, USA
Quote:
Popo you nailed my question which was not properly put together sorry. Thanks for the information I thought that you need to have a very small aperture F2.8 to get such images plus PP thanks again Popo this will help me a great deal! Nalin


OK...so I understand you were talking about that out-of-focus blurred background. I too didn't really understand the 'matte' reference at first. Indeed, large apertures are one way to get more softly blurred, out of focus backgrounds (called 'bokeh'). However, there are lots of factors that go into getting those backgrounds, and small apertures aren't always necessary.

First, sensor size makes a difference. Small sensor cameras, like P&S cameras, will have more trouble with this effect, because they have very wide depth of field...more stuff in focus for a much longer distance. Typically, the larger the sensor, the shallower the depth of field control. Full frame sensor DSLR cameras will be the best for this. However, even with small sensor ultrazoom P&S cameras, you can still get blurred backgrounds. Which brings me to...

Second, distance is the biggest factor. The farther the photographer is from the subject, and the more zoom he uses to get closer to the subject, the shallower the depth of field will become. So that's why typically big-zoom lenses and long telephoto lenses will produce this effect more than small zooms.

Third, distance from subject to background also makes a big difference. If you are shooting a bird sitting just a foot away from a branch behind him, you would need a very large aperture (small f-stop) on a big sensor to get the depth of field shallow enough to blur the branch. However, move that branch back 10 feet behind the bird, and now even at F8 or F11, you still have an out of focus background.

So put all of those things together...DSLR with larger sensor, a big zoom lens, lots of distance between photographer and subject, and lots of distance between subject and background, and you can get those nice, matte looking backgrounds even with a fairly small aperture.

And the lens can make a difference too. Some lenses are known for having a very nice, smooth transition from focus area to out of focus area - a 'creamy' look to the backgrounds and soft circles for highlight areas - this is what is desirable in good 'bokeh'...whereas some lenses can be a little harsh - not as smooth in the background, or highlights that are out of focus looking misshapen or not nicely rounded. This is what is often referred to as 'harsh bokeh'.

Hope that helps!

_________________
Justin Miller
Sony DSLR-A580 / Sony 18-250mm / Minolta 50mm F1.7 / Sigma 30mm F1.4 / Tamron 10-24mm / Tamron 150-600mm / Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro / Minolta 300mm F4 APO
Sony A6000 / 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 / 55-210mm F4-6.3 / 10-18mm F4 / 35mm F1.8 / 16mm F2.8 / via manual adapter, lots of Pentax K mount, Konica K/AR mount, and Leica M mount manual lenses

Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg


Last edited by zackiedawg on Sun Apr 25, 2010 6:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 9:06 am
Posts: 387
Location: Manchester (UK)
a blurred background is achieved with a LARGE aperture. As the aperture is measured as a fraction of the focal length, a low f-number/aperture value e.g f/4 is actually a bigger aperture (hole) then f/16 in the same way that 1/4 of a cake is bigger than 1/16 of a cake.

_________________
Canon EOS 400D, EF-S 18-55mm, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 50mm f/1.8 MK I, EF-S 10-22mm, EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM, EF 35mm f/2 IS, EF 85mm f/1.8
Canon 430EX II, Manfrotto 055CXPRO3, Arca Swiss P0
Panasonic GX1, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Olympus 45mm f/1.8
Canon EOS 30/33 and Pentax MX/ME Super
Rollei 35S

MY FLICKR!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 25, 2010 6:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:23 pm
Posts: 827
Location: Boca Raton, FL, USA
Indeed - I have absolutely no idea how I wrote the word 'small' throughout the post. Don't post when you're doing something else at the same time. Seriously. It just makes no sense at all that I wrote that! Shockingly, I actually know about apertures...really...it just doesn't look that way. And I cannot tell you how many people I've explained apertures and F-stop values to. Correctly! I don't think I even posted that - I think I was abducted by aliens, and there was an alien surrogate controlling my body at the time. I've corrected the surrogate alien's mistakes in my thread above.

_________________
Justin Miller
Sony DSLR-A580 / Sony 18-250mm / Minolta 50mm F1.7 / Sigma 30mm F1.4 / Tamron 10-24mm / Tamron 150-600mm / Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro / Minolta 300mm F4 APO
Sony A6000 / 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 / 55-210mm F4-6.3 / 10-18mm F4 / 35mm F1.8 / 16mm F2.8 / via manual adapter, lots of Pentax K mount, Konica K/AR mount, and Leica M mount manual lenses

Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group