Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes  (Read 14589 times)

dwdallam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2044
    • http://www.dwdallam.com
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« on: June 28, 2008, 07:17:39 am »

What is your method for getting both eyes sharp when you are shooting a a head shot with the models face turned 45 degrees from camera focal plane? This is where the eyes are closer and further away, or front and back from the camera.

I've tried several approches with varying degrees of success.

2. Bridge of the nose: depending on focal length, aperture, and distance to subject, sometimes sharp sometimes not.
3. Closest tear duct: crap.
4. Backing away from the subject, bridge of the nose, and cropping in post process--sharp.
5. Same thing as 4 but at 200mm+ at 10+ yards. Same effect in that DOF becomes greater at the subject.

Specifically, is there a method to get both eyes sharp when you are using a 70mm lens and shooting at 4-5.6 at about 2.5 feet from the models face? Sometimes space is tight you know.

The image below is an example, but her face is even less than 45 degrees. But you get the point.

Thanks.

200mm f5 1/200th ISO 100 at about 8-10 feet.
Logged

E_Edwards

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2008, 07:28:30 am »

Hmm, you can't defy the laws of physics.

With that aperture and that distance-to-subject and lens, etc. something's got to give. I tend to focus on the nearest eye, but I tend to shoot f8 or even f11 at least.

Edward
Logged

Graham Mitchell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2281
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2008, 07:39:05 am »

Quote
Hmm, you can't defy the laws of physics.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204147\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well you could do it with a tilt/shift lens
Logged

E_Edwards

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #3 on: June 28, 2008, 08:13:22 am »

Getting the two eyes in focus is relatively simple when you stop down enough and you keep to a reasonable distance.

There are more demanding situations where you are shooting jewelry on a model, such as a necklace, and have to keep both the product and the model's face in focus. Again, stopping down to the maximum you can without the lens going too soft, keeping your distance to the model to something that you can crop a little but not too much that you lose detail and the angle at which you shoot can help.

But also bracketing successive shots with focus on model, then focus on jewelry and so on, in case you need to comp in post.

Edward
Logged

dwdallam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2044
    • http://www.dwdallam.com
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #4 on: June 28, 2008, 08:15:24 am »

Quote
Well you could do it with a tilt/shift lens
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204150\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That a boy. Damn right. LOL.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2008, 08:28:19 am by dwdallam »
Logged

dwdallam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2044
    • http://www.dwdallam.com
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #5 on: June 28, 2008, 08:20:00 am »

Quote
Getting the two eyes in focus is relatively simple when you stop down enough and you keep to a reasonable distance.

Edward
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204155\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What's a reasonable distance given X focal length + aperture? Are we talking hyper-focal distances here? Also, what if you want to throw the background out of focus and it's only 10 feet behind? You really can't use F11. Am I making something out of nothing, or is this a real concern?
« Last Edit: June 28, 2008, 08:20:38 am by dwdallam »
Logged

Markpark

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
    • http://www.markkuipers.nl
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #6 on: June 28, 2008, 08:34:27 am »

you want things you can't have. If you really want an out of focus background..  you have to shoot at either a larger aperture of move away from the background, of use different focal length.

If you don't want a different focal length and can not move away from the background, you have to use an open aperture.. no other way. So either change the position of hear head (straight to the cam), use a t/s lens.. or accept the fact that one eye will be out of focus. Or.. when the out of focus is more annoying than an in focus background... stop down.

Like said before.. it's physics.
Logged

dwdallam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2044
    • http://www.dwdallam.com
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #7 on: June 28, 2008, 08:40:33 am »

Quote
you want things you can't have. If you really want an out of focus background..  you have to shoot at either a larger aperture of move away from the background, of use different focal length.

If you don't want a different focal length and can not move away from the background, you have to use an open aperture.. no other way. So either change the position of hear head (straight to the cam), use a t/s lens.. or accept the fact that one eye will be out of focus. Or.. when the out of focus is more annoying than an in focus background... stop down.

Like said before.. it's physics.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204161\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, I understand that. I'm just wanting to be thorough in my analysis. Still, do you follow any quick rules, or hyper focal? For instance, I could use a 16mm lens at F4 at say 5 feet, and then crop to the size I want--everything is in focus on the model. I mean have I been thinking correctly here?
Logged

Steven Draper

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 147
    • http://www.stevendraperphotography.com
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #8 on: June 28, 2008, 09:00:31 am »

Quote
Yes, I understand that. I'm just wanting to be thorough in my analysis. Still, do you follow any quick rules, or hyper focal? For instance, I could use a 16mm lens at F4 at say 5 feet, and then crop to the size I want--everything is in focus on the model. I mean have I been thinking correctly here?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204162\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

But would that mean you run the risk of slight facial distortions because of the wider angle?
Logged
image examples are at my website  [url=h

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #9 on: June 28, 2008, 10:44:48 am »

You are missing an important point here - perhaps the most important one: the right choice of focal length governs the drawing of the picture.

On FF 35mm I would stay with 135mm lens, which at about 5ft - 5.5ft will give you a fairly full head shot with a pleasant perspective; backing away to include more will change that, unfortunately, and if you end up at the distance where a 200mm would have given the full-frame close-up, then it flattens the face too much. Of course, only my opinion, but I did specialise in model work. Ask James what he´d suggest; a more contemporary opinion than mine is always worth having.

I would avoid the cropping ruse: something always gets lost...

At the same time as I was working, lots of photographers swore by 105mm, so take your pick, but for FF 35mm I would never go shorter.

Ciao - Rob C
« Last Edit: June 28, 2008, 10:45:43 am by Rob C »
Logged

James R Russell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
    • http://www.russellrutherford.com/
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #10 on: June 28, 2008, 11:44:16 am »

Quote
What is your method for getting both eyes sharp when you are shooting a a head shot with the models face turned 45 degrees from camera focal plane? This is where the eyes are closer and further away, or front and back from the camera.

I've tried several approches with varying degrees of success.

2. Bridge of the nose: depending on focal length, aperture, and distance to subject, sometimes sharp sometimes not.
3. Closest tear duct: crap.
4. Backing away from the subject, bridge of the nose, and cropping in post process--sharp.
5. Same thing as 4 but at 200mm+ at 10+ yards. Same effect in that DOF becomes greater at the subject.

Specifically, is there a method to get both eyes sharp when you are using a 70mm lens and shooting at 4-5.6 at about 2.5 feet from the models face? Sometimes space is tight you know.

The image below is an example, but her face is even less than 45 degrees. But you get the point.

Thanks.

200mm f5 1/200th ISO 100 at about 8-10 feet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204145\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


A photograph isn't about numbers or hard and fast rules.  In fact, the moment you say, oh yea a portrait must be a 105mm lens, or a beauty shot must require soft broad light with 40% fill, then you've pretty much lost your way.

Any photograph, especially a portrait must have a clear intent.

Is the intent to make the subject look traditionally pretty (like you showed in your photo?), or unique to themselves, or is it a statement of the artist.

Some portrait photographers have a very strong style and that style crosses all subjects, but it is as much a portrait of the photographer as it is the subject.  Good for the photographer, probably not so good for the subject, depending on your point of view.

If your learning, probably the best thing to do is to stick with one lens and work that until you understand it.  I would suggest wider instead of longer, as it will teach you to manipulate the subject and "fix" the image in front of the camera, rather than just throwing on longer lenses and trying to "fix" it yourslef.

It's not the distance, F-stop, or whatever, it's more of how you place the camera.

Actually, it's a shame more people don't start with view cameras, because then you learn how just keeping the subject level to the film plane (or not)  can change the perspective and look of the photo as much as any change of lens.

With digital we truly are getting in the flat plane look of photography since most of the lenses don't move and with the dslrs, especially the Canons have such a heavy filter and smooth look that the detail is beginning to look less sharp than what we had with film or what you get with a non AA filtered camera.

Pesonally I think a lot of digital looks too smooth and if there is any reason to buy a mfdb, it's probalby because of the no aa filter.

One more thing, if your in the learning process (I guess we're all in the learning process), don't follow the rules, just break them, but never forget the intent of the photograph.





JR
« Last Edit: June 28, 2008, 11:52:12 am by James R Russell »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #11 on: June 28, 2008, 11:56:53 am »

Quote
.

With digital we truly are getting in the flat plane look of photography since most of the lenses don't move and with the dslrs, especially the Canons have such a heavy filter and smooth look that the detail is beginning to look less sharp than what we had with film or what you get with a non AA filtered camera.

Pesonally I think a lot of digital looks too smooth and if there is any reason to buy a mfdb, it's probalby because of the no aa filter.

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204180\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi James

Thanks for jumping in so quickly with a response - I was also a bit surprised, but mainly gratified, by your comment on undue smoothness! Sort of goes in the direction of my earlier thoughts, where I had my doubts about current trends in models´skin textures in beauty and fashion work.

Ciao - Rob C

James R Russell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
    • http://www.russellrutherford.com/
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #12 on: June 28, 2008, 12:10:23 pm »

Quote
Hi James

Thanks for jumping in so quickly with a response - I was also a bit surprised, but mainly gratified, by your comment on undue smoothness! Sort of goes in the direction of my earlier thoughts, where I had my doubts about current trends in models´skin textures in beauty and fashion work.

Ciao - Rob C
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204182\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


You just don't like retouching, but we're in a retouch world and if you don't believe look at the number of plastic surgeons in your town.

Last year I was at my retouchers and she had a print of a B list startlet lying in the grass nude.

I said, wow you've don't a lot of work on that image and the retoucher said "I haven't started yet".

Regardless,

Some people can retouch and still hold the integrity of the image some can't but usually the reason you see such overall smoothness is we retouch at 100% but once knocked down to the web size it looks too smooth, too clean.

Photographer's do not set the current "trend" (actually I wouldn't call it a trend), on retouching, clients do and most of the reason you see a lot of too smooth looks is there are a lot of not so good retouchers.



JR
Logged

Frank Doorhof

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1522
    • http://
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #13 on: June 28, 2008, 01:54:56 pm »

The problem is well know by several photographers and a reason some won't post online anymore.
I have posted several time 100% crops because people were claiming there was no skin detail. Going back from 22MP to 799 on the longest side will kill detail (duh )

On you original question.
It's indeed a matter of shooting with a smaller aperture.
OR....
you can try to figure out when the angle of your camera to your model will get both eyes in a focusplane, but you're compostion will not be what you want as I read it here.

There is no trick, you have to shoot for what you need, I personally love the fact that one eye is sharp and the other not.

If you really want both eyes in sharp a DSLR with a long lens could be an option, but it won't throw your background completly out of focus unless you move your model FAR away from the background.

So it's a question that cannot be answered with a simple trick.
Well a T&S would indeed help
Logged

Frank Doorhof

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1522
    • http://
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #14 on: June 28, 2008, 01:56:24 pm »

Just reading the previous posts, James allready mentioned the viewcamera and the focus plane, so that's double from my part, sorry.
Logged

dwdallam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2044
    • http://www.dwdallam.com
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #15 on: June 29, 2008, 01:41:39 am »

Quote
But would that mean you run the risk of slight facial distortions because of the wider angle?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204165\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That depends on where you shoot the face and how far away you are from the face. But yes, it will distort. You can use the distortion to advantage too, as you know, such as getting close and low to a models legs while she is lying down, and shooting up toward her face, which will make her legs look really, really long.

In any event, yes, you are correct. However, if you shoot the face 5 feet back and it's in the middle of the frame, you should be ok, or maybe 8 feet. You get my point. It will look different than a 200mm lens at an equal frame filling distance. For example, if you shoot the model 3/4 body at 8 feet with the 16mm and then back up with a 200mm until you get the same 3/4's of the body in the frame, the images will look different. Both can be good.  I'm not trying to insult your knowledge on the subject, though. I'm sure you were just trying to make me think about my statement.
Logged

dwdallam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2044
    • http://www.dwdallam.com
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #16 on: June 29, 2008, 01:52:16 am »

Quote
You are missing an important point here - perhaps the most important one: the right choice of focal length governs the drawing of the picture.

On FF 35mm I would stay with 135mm lens, which at about 5ft - 5.5ft will give you a fairly full head shot with a pleasant perspective; backing away to include more will change that, unfortunately, and if you end up at the distance where a 200mm would have given the full-frame close-up, then it flattens the face too much. Of course, only my opinion, but I did specialise in model work. Ask James what he´d suggest; a more contemporary opinion than mine is always worth having.

I would avoid the cropping ruse: something always gets lost...

At the same time as I was working, lots of photographers swore by 105mm, so take your pick, but for FF 35mm I would never go shorter.

Ciao - Rob C
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204175\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In my experience, which is vastly minuscule to most of yours, that is my perception too. When I shoot model shots, I like to use my 70-200L, inbetween 100 and 180mm, and even use it with my 1.4 teleconverter at 280mm for some shots.  It just seems to give the best "look." Although I'm not bitching about the image above, which was taken at 70mm with my 24-70.

It's just harder to get right with a shorter focal length, or it's a less forgiving effort given you have to get a lot closer to the model, which meanws less DOF and more possible distortion. I've actually seen photographers using 400mm lenses and talking to the models on handset. The reason I understand why they do this is to get the entire model in sharp focus, from bust up say, and still have that nice completely blurred background, plus sharp eyes, since at 50 yards, the DOF is wide enough to get both eyes sharp in focus using f4.

Rob, I've never cropped that much either. I prefer not to but if it works, I'd be hard pressed to say why not, except that yes, you lose detail.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2008, 01:54:04 am by dwdallam »
Logged

dwdallam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2044
    • http://www.dwdallam.com
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #17 on: June 29, 2008, 02:02:52 am »

Quote
A photograph isn't about numbers or hard and fast rules.  In fact, the moment you say, oh yea a portrait must be a 105mm lens, or a beauty shot must require soft broad light with 40% fill, then you've pretty much lost your way.

Any photograph, especially a portrait must have a clear intent.

Is the intent to make the subject look traditionally pretty (like you showed in your photo?), or unique to themselves, or is it a statement of the artist.

Some portrait photographers have a very strong style and that style crosses all subjects, but it is as much a portrait of the photographer as it is the subject.  Good for the photographer, probably not so good for the subject, depending on your point of view.

If your learning, probably the best thing to do is to stick with one lens and work that until you understand it.  I would suggest wider instead of longer, as it will teach you to manipulate the subject and "fix" the image in front of the camera, rather than just throwing on longer lenses and trying to "fix" it yourslef.

It's not the distance, F-stop, or whatever, it's more of how you place the camera.

Actually, it's a shame more people don't start with view cameras, because then you learn how just keeping the subject level to the film plane (or not)  can change the perspective and look of the photo as much as any change of lens.

With digital we truly are getting in the flat plane look of photography since most of the lenses don't move and with the dslrs, especially the Canons have such a heavy filter and smooth look that the detail is beginning to look less sharp than what we had with film or what you get with a non AA filtered camera.

Pesonally I think a lot of digital looks too smooth and if there is any reason to buy a mfdb, it's probalby because of the no aa filter.

One more thing, if your in the learning process (I guess we're all in the learning process), don't follow the rules, just break them, but never forget the intent of the photograph.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204180\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree with all you said here. I also understand focal plane and changing perspectives, but if we all stuck to film planes, our images would all start to look the same. Rules, and this is your point too, are just good starting points, but also, you can't change the physics of the lens, camera, and light. I've read numerous books and essays on this subject, and many photographers say things like, Shoot for the bridge of the nose, the closest tear duct gland, or use the hyperfocal distance and make sure your focal point is 1/3 of the way into where ever you need the front 1/3 and the back 2/3s in focus, given that focal length and aperture you're shooting. I'm just wondering what you all do, or if you even worry about it at all.

It's quite easy, as you all know, to keep anything sharp when the subject is parallel to the film plane or sensor plane. That just isn't gonna happen lest all shot are frontal shots, or we use tilt lenses, which probably won't cure, but improve anyway.
Logged

dwdallam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2044
    • http://www.dwdallam.com
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #18 on: June 29, 2008, 02:05:49 am »

Quote
Hi James

Thanks for jumping in so quickly with a response - I was also a bit surprised, but mainly gratified, by your comment on undue smoothness! Sort of goes in the direction of my earlier thoughts, where I had my doubts about current trends in models´skin textures in beauty and fashion work.

Ciao - Rob C
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204182\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yeah everything is smoooooooth these days. perhaps this is a result of PS where you can make the worst skin baby smooth really fast in post processing. I've gotten so good at it I can smooth a face and take out 99% of unwanted lines, zits, and blemishes in about 3 minutes from start to finish. Of course I do have a secret weapon that I've learned to tweak that speeds that process up about 75% also.
Logged

dwdallam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2044
    • http://www.dwdallam.com
Portrait/People what is your method for sharp eyes
« Reply #19 on: June 29, 2008, 02:07:13 am »

Quote
Hi James

Thanks for jumping in so quickly with a response - I was also a bit surprised, but mainly gratified, by your comment on undue smoothness! Sort of goes in the direction of my earlier thoughts, where I had my doubts about current trends in models´skin textures in beauty and fashion work.

Ciao - Rob C
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204182\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Either that or the clients like it, and so do their agents?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up