Photography.ca » depth of field

116 — Sharpness on Steroids — Focus stacking interview with Michael Breitung

Marko Kulik — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 15:10:13 +0000

Photography podcast #116 features an interview with German landscape photographer Michael Breitung where we talk about why and how to do focus stacking in photography. Basically focus stacking involves taking multiple frames of the same scene but each frame is focused at a different part of the image. Then these frames are blended together using a graphics program like Gimp (free) or Photoshop (expensive). The result is sharpness and depth of field on steroids that can’t be matched by any camera lens combination on a 35mm DSLR camera at the time of this writing. Only tilt shift lenses can compete in this extreme sharpness arena, but those lenses require many saved dollars or a rich uncle. This technique is free if you have the skills and a graphics program.

Scroll to the BOTTOM of this post to find the player to immediately listen to the audio podcast.

Bloody Causeway by Michael Breitung — This focus stacked image blends 4 frames into one. Each frame was focused at a different point and then blended in Photoshop. Check out the sharpness from the closest corners all the way to the end of the causeway. This is sharpness swimming in awesome sauce. The aperture used here was f/9.5

Kraichgau at Dawn — Focus stacked photograph by Michael Breitung

Kraichgau at Dawn Details — Close up comparison by Michael Breitung — Only 2 frames were needed to create the final full-sized image above this one. One frame (left) focused at the foreground corners, gets the corners sharp in the final image. The other frame (right) focused at the midground, gets both the midground and the background sharp. Then the frames are blended in Photoshop to produce the final image. The aperture used here was f/11.

Links /resources mentioned in this podcast:
Michael Breitung Photography
Michael Breitung’s (advanced) start to finish tutorial on his (Lightroom/Photoshop) post-processing workflow and how he created the Bloody Causeway image.
Helicon Focus image stacking software
Zerene Stacker
Tilt shift lenses in landscape photography
March 2013 regular Assignment — Wet or Rain
March 2013 level 2 Assignment — Dramatic angles

If you liked this podcast and want to review it on Itunes, this link gets you to the main page

If you are interested in writing for our blog please contact me photography.ca ( A T ) G m ail Dot co m (using standard email formatting)

Please join the Photography.ca fan page on Facebook

My Facebook profile — Feel free to “friend” me — please just mention Photography.ca
My Twitter page — I will follow you if you follow me — Let’s connect — PLEASE email me and tell me who you are in case I don’t reciprocate because I think you are a spammer.

If you are still lurking on our forum,
feel free to join our friendly Photography forum

Thanks to D. Lavoie who posted a blog comment about our last podcast. Thanks as well to everyone that sent comments by email about our last podcast. Although ALL comments are appreciated, commenting directly in this blog is preferred. Thanks as well to all the new members of the bulletin board. Most of the links to actual the products are affiliate links that help support this site. Thanks in advance if you purchase through those links.

If you are looking at this material on any other site except Photography.ca — Please hop on over to the Photography.ca blog and podcast and get this and other photography info directly from the source. |Subscribe with iTunes|Subscribe via RSS feed |Subscribe with Google Reader|Subscribe for free to the Photography podcast — Photography.ca and get all the posts/podcasts by Email
You can download this photography podcast directly by clicking the preceding link or listen to it almost immediately with the embedded player below.

Thanks for listening and keep on shooting!

F-16 Isn’t Magic

Marko Kulik — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 20:26:22 +0000

I’ve been giving photo courses lately and I’m coming across a few points that people are regularly having trouble with. The limits of depth of field (or how sharp objects should be in general) is one of the things that many photographers don’t comprehend. This is often because they are aware of only one of the three factors that determine depth of field, namely the aperture. Many of us know that when we use a small aperture we get good sharpness from foreground to background versus large apertures. But this is true only up to a certain point because two other factors are missing. A small aperture like F-16 isn’t a magic one that will give you great sharpness from foreground to background in all cases.

Take the following image called Rust for example. It was created by Crashcat from our forum for our monthly assignment called - June 2012 — f16 or smaller– Shooting with a small aperture. Thx Crashcat for the use of this image.

This image was shot at ISO 1600 f/16 at 1/20 using a 105mm lens.
As we can clearly see the depth of field here is shallow and this is because there are two other factors besides the chosen aperture that influence depth of field. These factors include the distance from the object we are photographing and the focal length we use. As we approach an object, depth of field diminishes. The longer the lens we use the less depth of field we will have versus using a shorter one.

The image we are looking at is a macro image and so the camera is very close to the object. Had the camera been farther way, we’d see more sharpness from the top of the screw to the bottom of the screw. Not tons more sharpness mind you, but more. The side effect is that the screw wouldn’t have the magnification that it does and would look less ‘close-up’.

Had this lens been wider, we’d also see a small increase in sharpness from the top of the screw to the bottom of the screw, but again the screw’s perspective would seem smaller.

There is no easy answer here. It’s just a matter of practising and knowing what to expect.

For those that are looking for fabulous precision, feel free to use a depth of field calculator which will show you the depth of field you can expect under any shooting condition.

Depth of field — Photography podcast # 2 — Photography.ca

photomarko — Fri, 15 Sep 2006 03:11:40 +0000

Our second podcast is dedicated to depth of field. We discuss in pretty good depth how to become more creative with depth of field. These 2 photographs below illustrate the differences between smaller and larger depths of field. Remember: A smaller aperture like F 16 results in both the background and the foreground being pretty sharp. A larger aperture like F 2.0 results in a sharp foreground and unsharp background. If you’d rather read the differences instead of listening to the podcast below, a good depth of field explanation is located here.

F-16 — Large depth of field. Image sharp throughout.

F-2.0 — Shallow depth of field. Only the foreground is sharp

If you see the player, use the player below to listen to the podcast — it’s faster. If you don’t see the player click the link below.

You can download our second podcast here. http://www.photography.ca/podcasts/photog_ca_podcast2.mp3

Photography podcast transcript #2