|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 2/12/2007
|
Hi Andre!
A too narrow aperture could be very well one reason for that. The thing is that the tree is not only too little blurry but also blurry in an almost "crystaline" way. Its contours seem to consist of a series of very hard lines, especially at the regions where it was hit most by the sunlight. To me it seems as if the blurryness consisted of several "echos" of the tree that are of much less intensity than the tree itself.
Following your idea, I try to understand what might have happened. Of course at too closed Fstops we would have more or less everything sharp, while at the other end of the Fstop range focusing at (almost) infinity would blur the foreground. Somewhere between the two extremes we have less blurryness of the objects in the foreground when focusing at the depth. I would think that this blurryness adds that kind of soft transition at the contours of these objects - a transition region that extends over a smaller region than when using wider apertures. Much like adding a stripe at the limiting lines between objects, that follows these lines, and has a color transition along its width that smoothly changes from the color of the one object to the color of the other. The width of this transition varies with aperture, from very small at closed Fstops to very big at open Fstops, but I would think that it remains smooth.
Here it seems that this stripe consists not of a smooth transition but rather of many repetitions of the contour lines that quickly change tonality from the colors of the tree to those of whatever comes after the tree. (This is what I meant with "echos":) So the question is, are there lenses that follow a somewhat different path of varying blurryness? If so, it would be very interesting to try them at such settings and light conditions that produce such echo lines.
I attached a small drawing for better understanding of what I mean - I hope it helps.
Thanks alot for the idea, Andre, and have a nice day!
Nick
|
Our case? |
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66327} 2/11/2007
|
Hi Nick,
Could it be simply that the Fstop was a little too closed? Maybe around F5.6 instead of around F2.8. A focus on the mountains in the background with an F2.8 or F3.5 should have given you a nice blurred tree in the foreground I think.
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 2/11/2007
|
Molti ringraziamenti, Simone!
Nick
|
|
|
|
Simone Tagliaferri
{K:28180} 2/11/2007
|
Bella e spettacolare. complimenti.
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 2/11/2007
|
Thanks a lot for the nice detailed comment and the hint, Ace!
The real sharp ones will be coming up at the end of the series on mountains in some days.
As said before I wanted to have the tree not quite sharp on the foreground to cause some kind of "main interest" on the background with the mountains, but the softness of the tree is quite a strange one. It is unsharp but in a strange way, that I didn't intend to have. I must think about that and find some possible explanation.
Best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 2/11/2007
|
Thanks a lot for the nice words, Sergio!
Have a nice Sunday,
Nick
|
|
|
|
Ace Star
{K:21040} 2/10/2007
|
that's one of my fav shots ... because i like these kind of shots especially tree in background and mountain in background!
excellent shot Nick ... this is special capture!
try to make them little sharper because with sharpness images look clear and clarity makes it look wonderfull!
good luck
|
|
|
|
Sergio Cárdenas
{K:25028} 2/10/2007
|
Beautiful scenary...lovery composition and the peak mountain in here...well done!
|
|
0 
