Jump to content
Wheat
 

Recommended Comments

Gorgeous photo, just a shame it's OOF. Should have used an aperture setting of 22 or as high as the camera goes in order to have the entire scene in focus. Too much of it is out of focus, and that's a distraction. You will likely also have needed a good sturdy tripod to take the picture at a high f-stop. 

Link to comment

Suggest use of a wide angle lens of 35mm or less like 24mm.  Some medium zoom offer 24 to 80mm zoom.  Set at 24mm, everything on the other side of a few feet will be in-focus.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Paul Richard Jones said:

Suggest use of a wide angle lens of 35mm or less like 24mm.  Some medium zoom offer 24 to 80mm zoom.  Set at 24mm, everything on the other side of a few feet will be in-focus.

35mm haft crop sensor is not a wide angle lens, my friend

Link to comment

There is almost always more than one thing effecting the success or failure of an image.

I will respectfully disagree with Mr. Klassen, F22 is not necessarily the best aperture to use. Each lens should be tested to determine its sharpest aperture. In most cases the sharpest aperture is 2 stops open from the smallest aperture. So if a lens stops down to f22 then f11 would probably be the sharpest aperture. But only a test will determine this. Smaller apertures can cause diffraction. Diffraction can degrade the sharpness of an image. You can read more about it here: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

You used a 60mm lens at f10. This combination on the Nikon D3000 will yield a total depth of field of 3.44 feet at a camera to subject distance of 10 feet. At f22 you would have increased that total to 8.75 feet of depth of field at a camera to subject distance of 10 feet. So you have to decide do I want the sharpness of f10 and 3.44 feet of depth of field or do I want the sharpness of f22 and 8.75 feet of depth of field? I imagine that you want neither because it looks like you want everything to be sharp from the highlighted wheat stalk that is close to the bottom left rule of thirds intersection point to the clouds in the background. Let's look at Hyperfocal Distance. At f10, a 60mm lens and a 10 foot camera to subject distance: You could have focused at a point 58.8 feet in front of the camera and your depth of field would have been from 29.4 feet to infinity. At f22 you could have focused at a point 26.3 feet in front of the camera and your depth of field would have been from 13.15 feet to infinity. This is probably closer to what you want but f22 can cause diffraction and a loss of sharpness. So focusing at the Hyperfocal Distance is probably not an option either. So we've looked at the aperture and the camera to subject distance and both came up short. So now lets look at the part of the universe you are photographing or the focal length of your lens. A 35mm lens at f11 and focused at the Hyperfocal Distance of 17.9 feet will yield depth of field from 8.95 feet to infinity. If you set the aperture at f13.5 your depth of field will start at 7.55 feet and extend to infinity. That means that instead of being 10 feet from the subject the camera can be placed either 8.85 (f11) or 7.55 (f13.5) feet from the subject. A 35mm lens will render the stalk of wheat smaller so moving in closer will hopefully bring it closer to the size that you want. This would be a good compromise between sharpness, subject size and depth of field. (All the numbers came from this website; http://dofmaster.com/dofjs.html)

As to the composition: When you place the horizon high in the composition the action, or subject, needs to be mowing toward or away from the camera. In this picture the action or subject is the highlighted wheat stalk that is close to the bottom left rule of thirds intersection point. It's the brightest one and the softest one. That individual stalk connects the sky to the field and has to be sharp for the composition to be successful. If you had placed the horizon low, like Alexlky showed, then the subject would need to be moving left to right or right to left in the composition. Look at his panoramic crop. All of the wheat stalks are now the subject and the one highlighted wheat stalk that is the subject of the original composition is now just one of the many. If you move so that the edge of the wheat field is in front of your camera, instead of you being in the middle of the wheat field, this new camera placement would allow you to revisit the depth of field and the lens selection. With that one highlighted wheat stalk gone, a greater distance between the camera and the wheat field and the horizon placed low in the composition, the 60mm lens might work.

This is an example of how depth of field and composition are put together to make a successful image. 

http://www.mikenortonphotography.com

Link to comment
On August 13, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Jonathan Klassen said:

I'm sorry, I shouldn't have opened my mouth so wide, Mike.  I'm a relative newbie.  I have a lot of respect for you.

No apologies necessary. Your 3rd and 4th sentences were right on the money!

Link to comment
4 hours ago, mikenorton said:

No apologies necessary. Your 3rd and 4th sentences were right on the money!

Many thanks for the help. It is very important for me to know your opinion.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, sakr60 said:

Many thanks for the help. It is very important for me to know your opinion.

You're welcome.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...