"Focus Bracketing" (no, seriously)

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

Back when I were a lad, our chief photographer used the only Canon 7s I've ever seen in captivity, along with a f1.2/50.

I know that he used focus bracketing with the lens wide open, on account of I saw him doing it at a folk gig I attended in my leisure time. I poked my nose into the darkroom the following morning and he was printing the shots on 10x8, looking for one that had the singer's eyes right in focus.

He found two, out of ten frames.

This was a man who knew that what matters is the result.

😎

 

[Ko.Fe.]

That's great.. but.. here's the thing..
the guy in the video is a) not shooting macros and b) using a Leica M (not exactly the tool you'd use for macros in the first place but I'm sure someone will say I'm absolutely wrong and that it's perfectly good to use for macros *waits for Jaap to show up* 😀)

Cheers,
Dave

It just camera and lens, doesn't matter if it is Leica or DSLR, same known technique. Nothing new. DOF is DOF always.
Cheers.

 

[dcsang]

It just camera and lens, doesn't matter if it is Leica or DSLR, same known technique. Nothing new. DOF is DOF always.
Cheers.

It's a technique that I can see being used for macro .. sure.. but portraits?!?!?!

That's someone who doesn't know the right equipment for the job.

Cheers,
Dave

 

[redisburning]

so we're not above criticizing proper technique now, are we?

let's say you **** up one of your shots with missed focus (we're all human) but you really like the light/composition. are you now going to call back the model, set everything up again, and take the picture?

this thread is 100x more stupid than the video. FFS

 

[DougK]

For testing I can "understand" why this would be used - but how practical is it to use "in the field" - especially when you consider the fact that, as Keith noted, RF focusing is quite accurate.

The only situation I can MAYBE see this used is for when you're 1) shooting wide open, 2) when you're at the minimum focus distance for the lens in question and 3) you're shooting moving objects/sports.

For a model that's standing still and you're no where near the minimum focus distance though?!?!?!?!

Cheers,
Dave

Totally agree. At the distance he's standing, even wide open he should have at least a little DOF to play with to cover a slight focus error.

EDIT: I'd also think that rocking back and forth would increase the likelihood of blurring the shot through motion.

 

[DNG]

He did say he shooting at large f/stops for this "Technique",
BUT, I'd imagine at 8-15 feet away, the DOF is plenty deep wide open for the Eyes/Nose & Mouth to be in focus in most cases..

as others said.... I don't see the need, and the EVF would help if he has problems with the LCD.

He used "Safe Cracking" which is not Focus Stacking the way he uses it .... He does slightly change the focus ring during his braketing... but, he does not do it to "Stack" then later... He says he will pic the sharpest image (the 1st and last ... Hahaha, and pick one of these)

I will "Re-Focus" for each shot... so I have 3-6 images to chose from, That is how I focus Bracket ;-)

 

[giellaleafapmu]

It's a technique that I can see being used for macro .. sure.. but portraits?!?!?!

That's someone who doesn't know the right equipment for the job.

Cheers,
Dave

Not only for macro, also some kind of product photography can benefit from this. I do this quite often with food photography, when the dof is so shallow that most of the picture is actually out of focus it is sometimes not exactly trivial to know which is the point which should be the sharpest and even tough I usually have my opinion I'd rather have one picture more than one less. Also, if it is stock one is shooting it is useful to have almost the same picture with, say, the shrimp or the rice in top focus as these pictures can be used in different context, for instance to go with an article about seafood or with one about the great value of rice in a diet.

GLF

 

[brbo]

"Whatever works for you"...





...unless you're typ240+noctilux rich.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

this thread is 100x more stupid than the video. FFS

That post is cruel, unkind and just plain hurtful.

Admittedly, it is also 100% accurate 😀

 

[unixrevolution]

I guess what I don't understand is how, if carefully focusing with the RF doesn't get it dead-on, a random amount forwards and backwards will.

It would seem to me to do this right, you'd have to rock back and forth taking at least 10-15 shots each direction, if the DOF is THAT thin and could be (or may not be!) off by THAT much, to get EXACTLY what you want in focus.

 

[redisburning]

focus is like exposure, there is no "correct" focus. there is a best focus for what you want to do.

If you take 3 exposures at different focus points, you simply select the one that is closest to what you wanted originally. If you take 3 when focused on a 45 degree face, you could get far eye, close eye and tip of the nose. If your RF is aligned perfectly AND you didn't move AND your eyesight is good enough to focus that accurately. You might also get close eye, tip of nose and straight up OoF.

it's fine to be careless when you are an amateur. I rarely bother with focus or exposure bracketing. but if someone was paying me, or even more if I was paying a model, I'd have to have a lobotomy to act as carelessly as many of the people in this thread suggest is perfectly fine.

rough, blurred and OoF is fine for certain styles. if you want to be in the shineys it just isnt.

 

[ferider]

You have to admit though, RIB, that if somebody was paying you, you would be unlikely to use an M240 + Noctilux + ND filter for this kind of shoot, no ?

 

[dcsang]

You have to admit though, RIB, that if somebody was paying you, you would be unlikely to use an M240 + Noctilux + ND filter for this kind of shoot, no ?

Which brings me back to choosing the right tool for the job at hand.

I can always use the head of a screwdriver to hammer in a nail IF it's all I had available to me...

(mind you, if dude has got the M9, the M240 and the f0.95 Noctilux it could be that truly IS all he has available to him because he doesn't have any money to purchase other equipment.. 😀 )

Cheers,
Dave

 

[furcafe]

Or at least know how to focus that combo properly.

You have to admit though, RIB, that if somebody was paying you, you would be unlikely to use an M240 + Noctilux + ND filter for this kind of shoot, no ?

 

[brbo]

I guess what I don't understand is how, if carefully focusing with the RF doesn't get it dead-on, a random amount forwards and backwards will.

In a way, focus bracketing IS (extra) careful focusing.

Besides, the guy in video uses focus and recompose a lot. I'd like to know a "dead-on" way of focusing with a rangefinder in this situation.

Sure, his movements seem random and quite excessive for my taste, but he's got the principles right. He's increasing the odds of getting away with a picture that he'll like.

 

[redisburning]

You have to admit though, RIB, that if somebody was paying you, you would be unlikely to use an M240 + Noctilux + ND filter for this kind of shoot, no ?

there is no other way to get that shallow DoF with that perspective and level of contrast unless you go to MF. And if you don't want to shoot tethered, well then the M240 actually is a good choice.

BTW even if you use a 1Dx and a 200/2 IS you may still need to bracket focus to get it exactly right. AF systems have slop inherent to their design.

regardless of the tool he is using, his is using good technique to maximize the hit rate of his focus with his preferred tool. you should note he is using a magnifier as well, on the most accurate RF ever put in a Leica, and he still brackets focus. just like how large format shooters take two exposures just in case.

being sloppy yourself is fine. making fun of someone for holding themselves to a higher technical standard than you do for yourself is completely asinine.

 

[redisburning]

Or at least know how to focus that combo properly.

well I compared his flickr to yours and regardless of how good the photographs are respectively, his technical image quality is a lot higher than yours.

which I guess implies you are extra garbage at using a rangefinder.

 

[BLKRCAT]

alright zip em up, this pissing contest is over.

 

[ferider]

RIB, I'm not sure why you think I'm sloppy 🙂

Nobody is saying focus bracketing has no uses. It's just easier, more accurate and much faster with other tools.

And, BTW, the Noct Nikkor has basically the same DOF as the Noctilux wide open. And then there is the Canon 50/1 USM as well.

That being said, I'm following ZF1's advice and leave this thread now.

Roland.

 

[redisburning]

And, BTW, the Noct Nikkor has less DOF than the Noctilux wide open. And then there is the Canon 50/1 USM as well.

Roland.

Roland, the Noct Nikkor does not have the same field of view and it is severely behind the Noctilux in off-axis contrast at large aperture. it doesn't catch up to the Noctilux in on-axis contrast until f11.

the Canon has the field of view but it's even further behind the Noctilux in contrast.