How could I have so misfocused...

[erikhaugsby]

...while shooting at ~f/16?
I just "discovered" this shot in a folder of negatives I took in Switzerland, and when I went to scan it horror struck me 😱 in the form of this grossly incorrect focus.

Can anybody help me with this? I know it isn't a scanner mis-focus as the grain is clear, and shots on either side of this frame were in crisp focus...I'm hating myself right now!

M2, 50DR, Ilford FP-4. and now that I think about it I'm inclined to believe I had the lens in "closeup" mode without knowing it; this still doesn't explain why this was the only poorly-focused image in the near surrounding shots.

thanks...

 

[Pherdinand]

hey, it's a DR. I am sure it was on very close focus.

 

[ferider]

Looks like slow shutter speed and camera shake to me.

Roland.

 

[back alley]

nothing seems to be in focus...i agree with rollie.

 

[erikhaugsby]

well, chalk up another lost image...

 

[Pherdinand]

the whites are perfectly in place and no preferential direction is visible for the blur. In case of motion blur due to slow speed, usually there's a trace of the moving highlights that can be easily followed. I'd say it IS gross misfocus.
Nothing is sharp, because there is nothing in the close foreground, everything seems to be at least at several meters distance.

 

[Ororaro]

Come on! This is full of aberrations and it's, of course, misfocuesd!

Now, if you look at your focus scale: even at f16 and if focused at closest ditance (1 meter), your dof is only going to extend to about 1.2 oe 1.3 meters.

Get the idea?

 

[MadMan2k]

I kind of like it, actually. Print it and wash it with dirty well water and let it dry, then it'll complete the effect and look sweet.

 

[RML]

These things happen, often when focusing on something that is repeated like this railing posts. It's very easy to mistake the one you think your focusing on with another. It happens to me more often than I care to remember. I now check whether I'm actually focusing on a distance that makes sense. Often I find out I've turned too far to the close-up side.

 

[Xmas]

A DR is not easy to (set) to near focus accidently, and wont come out of the near focus initial setting unless you mount the 'specs'. So unless you selected the initial setting and shot without focusing it seems unlikely.

Did some one else have access to the camera or did you have some close up shots with specs before this frame.

If you just fired assuming 20 feet had been prefocused you might have had it set at the close focus stop but not in the near focus region that would have been the easy way to get this.

Did you focus? Would you not have rcalled selecting the near focus region, did you have the specs with you?

Noel

 

[ferider]

It has nothing to do with lens focus - Check out the attached crop: movement of the camera up and left (or reverse).

Roland.

 

[RML]

It has nothing to do with lens focus - Check out the attached crop: movement of the camera up and left (or reverse).

Roland.

You mean the motion blur from the walking person there?

Why don't we see any of this so-called camera movement blur in the child with the umbrella, or the railing behind him, or... well, any other part of the shot?

 

[Xmas]

Hey it would have been a nice shot.

 

[ferider]

You mean the motion blur from the walking person there?

Why don't we see any of this so-called camera movement blur in the child with the umbrella, or the railing behind him, or... well, any other part of the shot?

1) if it's motion blur from a walking person then the shutter speed was slow enough to create loss of sharpness (like 1/15th or slower). Swiss don't walk too fast 🙂
2) it could also be a rotative movement of the camera. I feel the railing looks similar but this might just be my imagination (no real highlights there, quite grey).

All I'm saying is "Looks like slow shutter speed and camera shake to me.", see above. Sometimes you are lucky with slow speeds, sometimes unlucky.

Whatever.

 

[Xmas]

The nearer parts of railing seem to be less blurred than the furthest, could be roll blur as the shutter button went down or focused at 0.7 m?

Always set the camera at 7m F11 for grab shots, be like HCB.

Noel

 

[Rogrund]

I'd vote for misfocus: isn't the left part of the railing (which is closest to the camera) a bit sharper than the right part (further away from the camera)?

BTW: What a wonderful forum. We spend our friday night (here in Sweden, anyway) arguing whether a picture is blurred due to misfocus or camera movement! 😀

 

[Ororaro]

1) if it's motion blur from a walking person then the shutter speed was slow enough to create loss of sharpness (like 1/15th or slower). Swiss don't walk too fast 🙂
2) it could also be a rotative movement of the camera. I feel the railing looks similar but this might just be my imagination (no real highlights there, quite grey).

All I'm saying is "Looks like slow shutter speed and camera shake to me.", see above. Sometimes you are lucky with slow speeds, sometimes unlucky.

Whatever.

Ferider, I don't want to go into deep arguments, but you are soooo wrong.

 

[Ororaro]

I'd vote for misfocus: isn't the left part of the railing (which is closest to the camera) a bit sharper than the right part (further away from the camera)?

BTW: What a wonderful forum. We spend our friday night (here in Sweden, anyway) arguing whether a picture is blurred due to misfocus or camera movement! 😀

There's no debate. And I'm starting to think it's a debutant forum.

 

[40oz]

I kind of like it, actually. Print it and wash it with dirty well water and let it dry, then it'll complete the effect and look sweet.

I agree. It has it's own charm.

 

[erikhaugsby]

Did some one else have access to the camera or did you have some close up shots with specs before this frame.

Nobody touches my Leica 😀

Did you focus? Would you not have rcalled selecting the near focus region, did you have the specs with you?

I sure thought I focused; and I do not have the specs for the DR, not that I can't set it to close-focus without the specs...