 |
| Photographer: Mike Barker |
The photographer that sent this in is named Mike Barker, and he is based in Greenwood, Indiana. Mike has been shooting for about 22 years and absolutely loves what he does. I have been acquainted with Mike for maybe a year now and I am compelled to give him a personal honorable mention on his work. When I went back to look at his portfolio recently, I couldn't help but notice big improvement in his imagery. Mike has always been capable of delivering a good shot, but I just felt like there is a little extra something in his latest work.
The image above has something that many want in their shots... a blurred background. This technique is used when the photographer wishes for ALL the attention to go to the subject. In some cases the blurring can be even more dramatic making the background entirely unimportant (except for color). We will discuss this further when I go deeper into "aperture" and it's effects.
Time to put it on the line and go for it. Mike.... I won't mind a bit if you comment below and reveal your settings for everyone. Let's do it...
Based in the depth of field (blur in back and in front).... I'm going with a super low f-stop! My guess is a nifty 50 f1.4 or f1.8 lense. The distance from her face to her feet (which are blurred) is only a few feet, so I know that a f/3.5 kit lense won't do it. I'm going with an f/1.8!
Next.... based on the crispness of the shot, the shutter speed I'm guessing is 1/125 to 1/200. She is holding her pose so technically you could go a bit slower with the shutter especially if using a tripod. Slower shutter speeds however will detect ANY movement with the model or the photographer, resulting in a slightly motion blurred image.
I'm guessing an ISO of 400. I was going to guess a higher ISO but I noticed the background is a bit darker. Now there's lighting. Based on the side lighting of the face, I have to figure that all lighting was produced off camera. Not 100% certain about the source, but I'm not feeling that a flash was used but rather something continuous like a lamp.
That's it Mike.... how close did I get?
Thank you all for joining me for a little fun tonight. In a day or two, I will be outlining the "goods and bads" for each manual camera adjustment... and will be describing how each one affects another. Until then KEEP SHOOTING!
~Tommy Post
I am assuming a full frame sensor - and, I would suspect a fixed focal length lens was used with ambient lighting - with you on the 50mm f/1.8 lens, but not the f/stop ... the DOF is about 8" ... so, Mike could have shot at f/4.5 - f/5.6 and achieved the 6-8" of DOF from the focal plane and back (this is achievable with a kit lens); if its a cropped sensor, the f-stop would have to higher, or his distance to subject further away, say 10', and shooting at 50mm (80mm eq); the quality of grain on digital cameras is not comparable to film, so one can shoot at higher ISOs and still achieve a clean picture, on our Canon, grain is not really visibly distracting until you shoot above ISO1600 at 300ppi ... natural light, or warm incandescent lighting ... I would go with shutter at 1/200 at the fast end, definately no slower than 1/125 as the models feet only show signs of bokeh blur and no motion blur. Manual focus.
ReplyDeleteThis shot was taken on location in the model's actual bedroom. I just pinned up some black fabric on the back wall with push pins. It was not a large bedroom, so I had to open the closet door to get in there to get the shot with my NIFTY 50! Kudos to you both for guessing the lens correctly. I wanted that depth of field and my kit lens just couldn't deliver that f1.8 (kudos again). My Sony camera is a few years old, so the noise at higher ISO (even 400) is something a perfectionist like myself does not desire. I kept the ISO at 200 and shot MANUAL FOCUS with a TRIPOD at a slower 1/80 (using my remote). I could have used a higher ISO and a faster shutter speed, but quality is so very important and my older camera really makes me work hard to get those crisp shots! If I had a newer camera like you guys, I certainly would have used ISO 400 and a faster shutter speed!!! Heck, my camera's highest ISO is only 1600 and totally unusable :-( As far as the lighting goes, Tommy nailed it! I wouldn't exactly say I used ambient light. What I did was use a 300 watt (continuous lamp) photography bulb on a stand and pointed it away from the model and at the wall (to my left) which was a very light beige color and bounced it back at the model to warm and soften things up. Richard is right about the DOF being achievable with a kit lens. I just couldn't use my telephoto lens in her bedroom -- lol Very well educated guesses you 2!!! I think Tommy wins this one for hinting of a lower shutter speed with a tripod when Richard said "no slower than 1/125". Not everyone out there has the latest greatest equipment and I thank Tommy for providing this learning experience with his viewers whether they are pros, hobbyists, or somewhere in between (like me)!
ReplyDeleteI went with the low f/stop of 1.8 because (at least with my equipment and kit lenses)the f-stop of 3.5 can produce this effect, but to get tho whole subject in the frame you would have to be several feet away and zoomed in all the way. Most bedrooms arent so huge that you can set up so far away ;) Thanks again Mike for your photo.... and great work!! PS... believe it or not, my first mock up of this article went with ISO 200! But before posting it I went and second guessed LOL. Should have stuck with my gut.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bizsumagazine.com/tommy-s-blog
ReplyDelete