DougFord
on the good foot
So it's ok to change the FOV (cropping) after the fact, but it you have the resources to change the DOF, it's not?
Who knew?
Who knew?
furcafe
Veteran
Or implies that he does a better job of managing his flickr stream (which is mostly made up of SLR shots, BTW).
Certainly implies that you are at least as careless & asinine as you accuse others of being.
Certainly implies that you are at least as careless & asinine as you accuse others of being.
furcafe
Veteran
Agree. Bracketing is for dealing w/unknowns, like exposure bracketing in changing light conditions or w/variable film stock. As brbo wrote, it's for increasing your odds; but when shooting mostly stationary models, it shouldn't be that difficult to nail focus, even at f/0.95, w/some practice (especially now that digital makes the learning curve less steep).
redisburning
Well-known
you seem angry.
can I get you some cream for that butthurt?
btw when you're done being angry, try to understand that I didn't say that to be personal. but rather to point out how ridiculous it is to accuse the man of not knowing how to use his camera when you don't have a single image on your flickr that is comparable to the guy's better stuff in terms of technical quality.
if you'd like to, I will listen to your justification as to how, in your words, I am as careless and asinine as I seem to think you are. because your post there is pretty non-sequitur and it mostly just seems like you're lashing out because I pointed out you were wrong at the expense of your photos.
at the end of the day, I can rest easy knowing that I'm on the right side of this argument. arguing against careful technique is laughable, even if you or your ilk don't understand why.
furcafe
Veteran
Sorry, not butthurt at all, just bored enough to respond. I would have used this emoticon if I had been angry.
My prior response to you was not a non-sequitur because you were denigrating my "extra garbage" RF skills by noting that the technical quality of Mr. Morvay's flickr stream was superior to mine. For the sake of argument, I'll totally concede the business about overall technical quality (especially if by that you mean use of hot chicks, lighting, focus, & other "bourgeois concepts"), but was pointing out that most of his flickr stream consists of dSLR shots, which prove nothing about his ability to focus an RF (see apples v. apples).
You, in contrast, seem a little butthurt in defending Mr. Morvay, or rather "proper technique", against mostly strawman attacks, i.e, that we're all careless & are ignorant of proper technique. There's a difference between being careful & knowing which technique to apply in the first place. I think most people on this thread are really mocking the context in which he's using focus bracketing, not the concept of focus bracketing in general & under all circumstances. To me, it looks like he's using it when it's not necessary, i.e., he's "bracketing" to cover for an inability to consistently nail focus, i.e., getting it right to begin with. It's "measure twice, cut once", not "measure once, cut once, on a bunch of different boards & then pick out the one where you ended up cutting it right".
Besides, I don't know if Mr. Morvay belongs to the RFF, but if someone points him towards this thread, I'm guessing he could easily defend himself & have a good laugh without the help of a self-appointed Emily Post of Proper Photographic Technique.
if I had been angry.My prior response to you was not a non-sequitur because you were denigrating my "extra garbage" RF skills by noting that the technical quality of Mr. Morvay's flickr stream was superior to mine. For the sake of argument, I'll totally concede the business about overall technical quality (especially if by that you mean use of hot chicks, lighting, focus, & other "bourgeois concepts"), but was pointing out that most of his flickr stream consists of dSLR shots, which prove nothing about his ability to focus an RF (see apples v. apples).
You, in contrast, seem a little butthurt in defending Mr. Morvay, or rather "proper technique", against mostly strawman attacks, i.e, that we're all careless & are ignorant of proper technique. There's a difference between being careful & knowing which technique to apply in the first place. I think most people on this thread are really mocking the context in which he's using focus bracketing, not the concept of focus bracketing in general & under all circumstances. To me, it looks like he's using it when it's not necessary, i.e., he's "bracketing" to cover for an inability to consistently nail focus, i.e., getting it right to begin with. It's "measure twice, cut once", not "measure once, cut once, on a bunch of different boards & then pick out the one where you ended up cutting it right".
Besides, I don't know if Mr. Morvay belongs to the RFF, but if someone points him towards this thread, I'm guessing he could easily defend himself & have a good laugh without the help of a self-appointed Emily Post of Proper Photographic Technique.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
I think "careful technique" is one thing.
A technique that is employed when it is not necessary is another.
Stand still, compose, focus, recompose, shoot.
Want to stop down a little? sure.. go ahead - improve your chances of getting the critical things in focus.
Don't want to stop down a little? that's ok too - shoot, check your back, shoot again.. check your back again. The Model isn't going anywhere - she's over there standing still. Model's don't charge "per shot" or "by the minute" so the likelihood of having to rush in such a situation is not necessary.
Rocking back and forth firing off umpteen photos? I've seen that used in wedding photography - we call it "spray and pray" - there is no "skill" or "technique" involved; it's simply hoping you get a shot that you want in focus.
As I said throughout this thread - I can totally understand "focus bracketing" being used for certain types of photography. For what this guy shows in this video; with the tools at hand - I'm sorry, but it's a waste of time - I don't think he'd be so devil-may-care if this was a film camera.
Cheers,
Dave
furcafe
Veteran
Totally agree as you make the same point I was trying to make, only clearer. Must help to be less than me.
BTW, models do often work on a clock, if not by the minute or billable hour unit (lawyer joke), & even when they aren't you often only have a certain amount of studio time/golden hour, etc. I can see how you might not want to break your flow/waste time by chimping to check focus, but either way, the best way to save time is to get it right the 1st time.
than me.BTW, models do often work on a clock, if not by the minute or billable hour unit (lawyer joke), & even when they aren't you often only have a certain amount of studio time/golden hour, etc. I can see how you might not want to break your flow/waste time by chimping to check focus, but either way, the best way to save time is to get it right the 1st time.
Murchu
Well-known
This a spoof ? Focus bracket while shooting a live, non-static model, and risk missing the pinnacle of the pose/ expression ? Bizarre if not a spoof..
Monochrom
Well-known
:O....for what i could see he uses those "techniques" to achieve perfect focus...but it´s nonsense...the RF can focus perfectly a noctilux...even you can use a magnifier to help a bit...
Guess the guy shots 99% of the time with his old pal dslr AF system..
Guess the guy shots 99% of the time with his old pal dslr AF system..
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I don't think anyone is denying that focus bracketing can have advantages ... ie food or macro shooting.
However ... the situation in which this guy is recommending it indicates to me that he's just another blowhard with a video camera and an internet connection!
However ... the situation in which this guy is recommending it indicates to me that he's just another blowhard with a video camera and an internet connection!
DougFord
on the good foot
...looks like he's got it surrounded.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
It's not commonly known that HCB used this method ... and I found proof while doing a search for his 'out takes!'
Richard G
Veteran
I have 'focus bracketed' with the ZM C Sonnar, even on the M9 as the LCD is unreliable in assessing sharpness. Mine has very little practical focus shift, but there is focus shift which I have tested for my lens and the M9 in detail. I do this not just because of the known focus shift, but because shooting wide open there are sometimes unexpected distracting areas of sharpness in patterned clothing, for instance, and a neighbouring shot, slightly different composition by that time, might have a more pleasing effect from that point of view, while still keeping an eye or two sharp.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Humour aside, I have to confess to rocking forward slightly when using my C Sonnar wide open to counteract the focus shift that afflicts it when prioritised for f1.5 shooting.
Contarama
Well-known
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.
That is the coolest thing I have read in a long time...
grapejohnson
Well-known
i used to joke with my friend when i got my first motor drive that i was going to start at infinity and go to minimum for every picture "just to make sure"
Vics
Veteran
He says he's using this on a Noctilux wide open. Looks to me like a good technique. At 1.1 all you have to do is breathe wrong and you're out of focus.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Same here.Humour aside, I have to confess to rocking forward slightly when using my C Sonnar wide open to counteract the focus shift that afflicts it when prioritised for f1.5 shooting.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
They ain't THAT rare. I've had two. Bought the first one as an outfit and sold it the same way -- didn't like the camera or the lens -- then bought another silly-cheap, sold the body immediately, had the lens rebuilt, and used it intermittently for a decade or three until I gave it to a friend as a 60th birthday present.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.
But I don't think this was focus bracketing in the case you're talking about. Having done much the same thing with exactly the same lens, and exactly the same thing with other fast lenses (up to and including f/1), it's mostly a question of dealing with subject movement.
Cheers,
R.
Sparrow
Veteran
... close up at f2.5 with the Nikon 105 I shoot the whole roll and hope to get a few in focus ... not strictly speaking bracketing, more wishful thinking