A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old June 7th 06, 02:14 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?


Dmac wrote:
Scott W wrote:
Dmac wrote:

Annika1980 wrote:

Like I told ya the other day, D-Mac. The problem with being
self-taught is the teacher!



Douglas J MacDonald, BE. BA, Hon.
Indentured Tradesman Photographer, 1964. Melbourne, Victoria Australia
Mentored by Malcolm Campbell at his St Kilda Studio, Melbourne,
1962 - 1974, R.I.P.

Sorry I don't have any Photoshop qualifications to crop my pics so they
can only be used for postcards the way yours are ...and unlike you,
don't have any experience using freeze spray to stop the action.

I am (for what it's worth - which is basically nothing) a member of
WIPM. For a backwoods boy that's; World Institute of Photographic
Masters. A shonky effort to provide wannabe Photographers with a $30
membership certificate I could have made for the cost of the paper. So
much for modern day "qualifications".

I am however far more qualified than you and probably the only working
photographer in Australia who qualified under the Apprenticeship
Commission and has indentures to prove I can legally claim to be a
qualified tradesman Photographer.



With all of that you have not yet learned to focus you camera
correctly?

Scott

Really?
If you think this discussion is about my inability, you are a bigger
****** than Bret.

If the shot was critical would not three different focus points via
bracketing, have resulted in one more acceptable than the others? I
checked my English Websters College Dictionary and it ain't there,
whats a ******?

  #22  
Old June 7th 06, 02:59 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?

http://www.dofmaster.com/digital_coc.html

The moderately entertaining program -

http://www.dofmaster.com/custom.html

  #23  
Old June 7th 06, 03:13 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?

Dmac wrote:

FYI I didn't "blow the Hyperfocal distance completely". I calculated it
correctly and obtained the picture I needed using my 5D. My question is
all about hyperfocal and a crop factor camera, not my ability or lack of
it.

Well no there is also the fact that after calculating the hyperfocal
distance you then focused on the near point, 25ft, and not at 50ft as
you should have. If you had focused at 50 ft then the people and
church would have been blurred equally. But what you said you got was
the people in focus and the church out so it sounds like you simple
focused on the people.

At f/11 on a 20D this blurring would be more then what most people
would find acceptable for anything larger then a 4 x 6 print.

There are a large number of web sites where you can read up on this
stuff, might be worth you time to do so. It might also be a good idea
to practice sometime when you are not doing a paying job and get a
feeling for what works and what does not. As others have pointed out
there is not hard limits on what CoC to use and so some experimentation
is called for.

Scott

  #24  
Old June 7th 06, 04:37 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?

C J Donoghue wrote:

Dmac wrote:


According the Lord of math, the hyperfocal distance of my 50mm lens is
25 feet at F/11. Supposedly everything from 25 feet to infinity will be
in focus. Unfortunately you can't tell if this is the case until you
examine the image on a computer.

Last week, I shot a wedding where I wanted the couple at about 25 feet
and a church at infinity plus all in between to be focused. I didn't get
the measuring tape out but I have a fair idea of how far away 25 feet is.

The picture is OK. The foreground is sharp but the church in the
distance is not as sharp as I'd have thought it would be considering the
maths of the matter. I reasoned any smaller than F/11 and the image
would start to lose sharpness and produce vignetting.

Anyway... Can someone offer a suggestion as to why the technical details
were right and the results with my 20D off? The same image from my 5D
was spot on. Have I missed something with the crop factor or are there
other considerations when the lens is on 1.6 crop camera?

Douglas



Presuming your couple were at 25 feet and the church was near enough to
infinity, then the hyperfocal distance - your focus point - should be 50
feet. Focus on 50 feet and the dof will extend from half the HD, i.e. 25 ft
to infinity, at the correct stop, of course. If you focused on 25 feet then
there's your problem. Dof when focused at 25 ft and f/11 extends from 13.5
ft to 174 ft, so the foreground and couple will be sharp, but the church will
probably be outside the 174 ft limit (from Dofmaster calculator).

From the DofMaster website calculator for APS-sized sensors with a CoC of
0.025mm, focusing on 50 ft at f/8 will give a dof of 22.6 feet to infinity.
If you focused directly on the couple for maximum sharpness (which is what I
would do), and wanted the church in as well, then your HD is 25 ft, the point
you focused on, and the aperture to extend the dof to infinity will be
f/13.5. This would also extend the dof in front of the couple to 12.4 feet -
so your total dof would be 12.4 ft to infinity when focused on 25 ft, which
obeys the rule of acceptable sharpness from half the HD to infinity.

But, as I well know, doing this in your head while shooting a wedding is all
but impossible.

Did you not think of using the 'A-dep' function on the camera?

Colin D.



There is a presumption in your post Colin that the CoC is 0.025 when in
fact it could be anywhere between 0.025 and 0.035 for a FF camera,
producing widely varying HF distances. Add to this the varying opinion
of what CoC of a 20D actually is and you can see my confusion on the issue.

Add to that the idiots whose numbers are growing by the minute, chiming
in with their barbs aimed at getting their rocks off at my expense, and
you must surely ask: Why bother? The answer will never come from this
bunch of rabble.

Crop factor cameras are here to stay. Unfortunately the technical
information we used to be able to rely on, now cannot be relied on.
Worse than this is that none of the self proclaimed "experts" here can
agree on what the CoC for a 20D actually is and you have a classic
Usenet situation where no one knows the answer but everyone wants a
piece of the action anyway. 'A-dep' is not practical for me in this
situation. Thanks anyway.
  #25  
Old June 7th 06, 04:45 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?

uw wayne wrote:
Dmac wrote:

Scott W wrote:

Dmac wrote:


Annika1980 wrote:


Like I told ya the other day, D-Mac. The problem with being
self-taught is the teacher!



Douglas J MacDonald, BE. BA, Hon.
Indentured Tradesman Photographer, 1964. Melbourne, Victoria Australia
Mentored by Malcolm Campbell at his St Kilda Studio, Melbourne,
1962 - 1974, R.I.P.

Sorry I don't have any Photoshop qualifications to crop my pics so they
can only be used for postcards the way yours are ...and unlike you,
don't have any experience using freeze spray to stop the action.

I am (for what it's worth - which is basically nothing) a member of
WIPM. For a backwoods boy that's; World Institute of Photographic
Masters. A shonky effort to provide wannabe Photographers with a $30
membership certificate I could have made for the cost of the paper. So
much for modern day "qualifications".

I am however far more qualified than you and probably the only working
photographer in Australia who qualified under the Apprenticeship
Commission and has indentures to prove I can legally claim to be a
qualified tradesman Photographer.


With all of that you have not yet learned to focus you camera
correctly?

Scott


Really?
If you think this discussion is about my inability, you are a bigger
****** than Bret.


If the shot was critical would not three different focus points via
bracketing, have resulted in one more acceptable than the others? I
checked my English Websters College Dictionary and it ain't there,
whats a ******?

Thanks for your suggestion. I got the shot with a 5D but question why I
couldn't get it with a 20D using the same calculations. It is clear now,
no one else knows the precise answer either.

A ****** is someone who masturbates - wanking is the pastime of ******s.
In Australia a person is said to be a ****** when they post the type
of remarks Tony Polson, Bret Douglas and Al Denelsberk have posted in
response to a perfectly proper question. They are ******s in true
meaning of the word.
  #26  
Old June 7th 06, 04:58 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?

Scott W wrote:
Dmac wrote:


FYI I didn't "blow the Hyperfocal distance completely". I calculated it
correctly and obtained the picture I needed using my 5D. My question is
all about hyperfocal and a crop factor camera, not my ability or lack of
it.


Well no there is also the fact that after calculating the hyperfocal
distance you then focused on the near point, 25ft, and not at 50ft as
you should have. If you had focused at 50 ft then the people and
church would have been blurred equally. But what you said you got was
the people in focus and the church out so it sounds like you simple
focused on the people.

At f/11 on a 20D this blurring would be more then what most people
would find acceptable for anything larger then a 4 x 6 print.

There are a large number of web sites where you can read up on this
stuff, might be worth you time to do so. It might also be a good idea
to practice sometime when you are not doing a paying job and get a
feeling for what works and what does not. As others have pointed out
there is not hard limits on what CoC to use and so some experimentation
is called for.

Scott


There you go again Scott.
Reading words which are simple not there. If you can point out where I
said I focused at the close point of the HF, you are reading the wrong
post!

My calculation was correct for a full frame sensor. It wasn't for a crop
factor sensor and if you think I had time to run to a PC hooked up to
the Internet with about 3 minutes of sunset left, just to see if my 20
year old calculation which has never let me down in the past, is also
compatible with a crop factor camera, you really do need to get a grip
on reality.

The 20D is the backup camera. Only an idiot would shoot a set of formal
portraits at a socialite's wedding of the year and not take backup shots
or have someone with a second camera covering their arse.

Your problem Scott, is a social one. You make presumptions of what you
"want" someone to have said so you can get your rocks off lambasting
them for what you perceive as their problem. Stop it mate. Some of your
posts make sense - they don't offer answers but your comments are
sometimes useful... Right up to where you start attacking someone. It's
a very bad habit you would do well to get out of.
  #27  
Old June 7th 06, 05:00 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?

JimKramer wrote:
http://www.dofmaster.com/digital_coc.html

The moderately entertaining program -

http://www.dofmaster.com/custom.html


Thank you for the link Jim.
Out of all this crap Usenet is famous for, comes a twinkling of knowledge.

Douglas
  #28  
Old June 7th 06, 06:31 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?

Dmac wrote in
:

Al Denelsbeck wrote:
Dmac wrote in news:hDnhg.4545$ap3.3028@news-
server.bigpond.net.au:


Annika1980 wrote:

Like I told ya the other day, D-Mac. The problem with being
self-taught is the teacher!



Douglas J MacDonald, BE. BA, Hon.
Indentured Tradesman Photographer, 1964. Melbourne, Victoria
Australia Mentored by Malcolm Campbell at his St Kilda Studio,
Melbourne, 1962 - 1974, R.I.P.

Sorry I don't have any Photoshop qualifications to crop my pics so
they can only be used for postcards the way yours are ...and unlike
you, don't have any experience using freeze spray to stop the action.

I am (for what it's worth - which is basically nothing) a member of
WIPM. For a backwoods boy that's; World Institute of Photographic
Masters. A shonky effort to provide wannabe Photographers with a $30
membership certificate I could have made for the cost of the paper.
So much for modern day "qualifications".

I am however far more qualified than you and probably the only
working photographer in Australia who qualified under the
Apprenticeship Commission and has indentures to prove I can legally
claim to be a qualified tradesman Photographer.

Sometimes Bret, you are a total ******... Read that as most time.

Douglas




And yet, you blew hyperfocal distance completely, don't
understand
that acceptable CoC is subjective and will depend on *how much of an
enlargement you aim for*, and didn't realize that different sensor
sizes would produce different results.

So, what exactly DO you get from your various titles?


- Al.

Considering no one (you included) here has actually come up with any
definitive information which can be verified as correct - like in
having text book reference or at least a publication to refer to, or
provide information that can be demonstrated to be accurate, your
repeated attempt to belittle me is far from a refreshing divergence.
All it does is show how shallow you really are and how little you
actually know.


And yet, I know the meaning of the word "subjective", which it might
do you a world of good to look into. But since it will simply mean another
seventy posts from a total nitwit who can't see the forest for the trees,
it means, and pay attention now:

THERE IS NO DEFINITIVE ANSWER.

Circle of Confusion is measured on the film plane, Brainiac. What you
obtain there is displayed in a million different ways depending on how
large you actually make the image afterwards. Therefore, any indication of
what is an acceptable CoC is dependent on how big it ends up in the final
product. Any decent guide to CoC, hyperfocal distance, depth of field, and
so on, will contain the caveat that the figures are based on a certain
print size from a certain negative size (usually the size of a 35mm frame,
though some guides may include the more common digital sensors now).

On top of that, what *you* consider acceptable sharpness may not be
what *I* consider acceptable sharpness, and this is something that you have
to decide for yourself. No one's going to help you out of this one by
telling you what you think. Got that down, too? Excellent.


It highlights your willingness to sink the boots in when someone asks
a question, rather than have the knowledge or ability to answer it.
Your's is just another post from yet another group idiot who flounders
when faced with a technical issue but decides to behave like an
immature fool with a childish retort for some quaint form of keyboard
sport.


Since you received several proper answers to your question, which you
then went into a tirade about, you would definitely appear to be the final
arbiter on childish behavior. I bow to your judgment.



FYI I didn't "blow the Hyperfocal distance completely". I calculated
it correctly and obtained the picture I needed using my 5D. My
question is all about hyperfocal and a crop factor camera, not my
ability or lack of it. Why don't you crawl back under your rock until
you hear another person you can attack?


And I quote: "the hyperfocal distance of my 50mm lens is
25 feet at F/11. Supposedly everything from 25 feet to infinity will be
in focus."

Now go look up "hyperfocal distance". See that part about it meaning
"the point at which everything from *half that distance* to infinity is in
focus"? Great. Where did you focus? Because if you didn't focus at 50 feet,
*past* the couple, you weren't utilizing hyperfocal distance. And if the
background was out of focus, you blew it.

Now, go re-read the part above about size of enlargement. The 20D has
a smaller sensor, so has to be enlarged more to match a print from the
larger sensor of the 5D. That means the CoC has been enlarged too. Larger
CoC means less sharpness, so yes, hyperfocal distance should be calculated
differently for a smaller sensor.

So, why are you being attacked? Because when it is pointed out to you
what you're actually working with, you go on the defensive and begin
insulting people because they're not telling you what you want to hear, but
instead, they're revealing cold hard facts. These are all basic factors in
photography. You're in a snit because someone won't tell you what "sharp"
is? Dude, try this definitive experiment: Look at the goddamn print. Is it
sharp to you? Does the client want it? Then there's your freaking answer.

Want to know how to calculate this? Shoot it, blow it up, and look at
it. Happy with it? Then you have your formula for acceptable depth-of-
field. Want it sharper? Then try again.

Not happy with that? Want someone to tell you the magic formula? Hey,
they DID. You used it. It fits the definition of sharp. You have your
answer. Don't be fooled by the belief that it doesn't LOOK sharp, Douglas.
Take it from the experts: it's sharp. So be happy.

Abra cadabra.


- Al.

--
To reply, insert dash in address to match domain below
Online photo gallery at www.wading-in.net
  #29  
Old June 7th 06, 07:47 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?


"Dmac" wrote in message
...
POTD.com.au wrote:


Different CoC (circles of confusion) must be considered for these cams,
due to their different sensor sizes and their need to be enlarged by
different amounts to get to the same size print. A 20D has a CoC of
0.019, while the 5D is 0.030.



At least 3 web sites offering to explain how to obtain the CoC ...all
differ in what they say it is for a 20D and 50mm lens. All of them, differ
from you Russell.


As mentioned before in this thread, acceptable sharpness is a subjective
thing and what is acceptable in a 6x4 inch print may not be so in a 14x11.
So for the purposes of "general" calculation most people use a 10x8 inch
print as the target to determine acceptable sharpness. (prob only because
this is the size chosen when it was first done way back when??) If you
desire a final result bigger than the this, then the increase must be
allowed for and a greater DOF range obtained over the calculators "guide"
and if you are printing smaller then you will get away with less.

From my experience I have found that the .016 of Dukak's calculator and the
..019 of Dofmaster's to be a very good guide for the 20D.


  #30  
Old June 7th 06, 07:57 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What next when the hyperfocal is wrong?

Dmac wrote:

There you go again Scott.
Reading words which are simple not there. If you can point out where I
said I focused at the close point of the HF, you are reading the wrong
post!


But you said the people where in focus and the church was not. If the
people were at 25ft and you focused at 50ft then the people and the
church would have been blurred by the same amount.

Scott

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hyperfocal Distances Alan McGrath Digital Photography 5 June 5th 06 11:22 PM
Hyperfocal distance Don Digital Photography 27 December 12th 05 02:57 AM
How to use knowledge of hyperfocal distance...? [email protected] Digital Photography 11 October 28th 05 03:36 PM
Looks like I was TOTALLY wrong about the new DREBEL -so far Larry Digital SLR Cameras 10 February 19th 05 12:25 PM
God! DOF Scale in my Lens DOES NOT Agreen with the Hyperfocal Formula! narke 35mm Photo Equipment 10 January 16th 05 06:46 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.