where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
I looked on Audrey Woulard Photography, the website, and saw a lot of photos, the DOF similar to this
And, this is a full frame D4, 135mm f/2.0 at f/2.0 and 1/250th sec. ISO 1000. From what I saw on her webs tie, this bokeh is very similar. And the full length shots with lots of bokeh are most likely shot with at least a 135mm or 200mm on full frame.
I looked at the website too. Good work. As we all suspected moderate to medium telephoto lens with large aperture, careful consideration of what is in the background and as much distance between subject and background as possible. Anyone can do this. The 85mm f1.8D shot wide open is a cheap start. The 85mm f1.4G is the expensive Nikon option and some reviews of that lens do think it "magical," contrary to what I first said about no "magic lens" producing the effects desired by the OP.
her stuff is very similar to some of what I do, hense me liking her work.
it should be noted that it is much easier to get good bokeh on a full body child shot than it is on a full body adult.
i should really look at getting the 85 1.4, i'm sure id use it more than my 105, but the 105 is pretty handy, and a possible 135 1.8 looks pretty sweet too.
That 85mm f1.4 looks quite good but pricy ($1,600.00). Some reviews:
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1357/cat/12
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/85mm-f14-afs.htm
Other Nikon options are the two f2 DC Nikon lenses at 105mm and 135mm which are also pricy.
Reviews of them:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/105mm-f2-dc.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/135mm-f2-dc.htm
Thanks so much again. This forum is great, and you're all so patient!
I'm not in the market for a new camera yet. So the full frame is out for now.
But I do have an 85 1:8. So, I'll keep practicing. I rented the 85 1:4 for a week.
It was great! I am confident that I will get it right, especially with all the advice I got here.
Hi, again, just shot some wide angle with bokeh, this AM with a Zeiss 28mm, f/2. This is a head/shoulder shot, but with children, a similar bokeh can be achieved ...
Oh, this is a member on NRF, but will remain anonymous at this time.
Looking at Audrey Woulard Photography confirmed what I thought - medium tele with a lot of distance behind the subject.
I did see some photoshop or maybe one of the "Bokeh" software work in some images. Very tastefully done but almost all of the images did utilize the subject separation from the background.
amelaj,
You are feeling the pain and frustration that that drove me to Nikon. I'd been shooting and loving my pentax gear until getting serious about portrature last year. I tried to solve the problem by throwing dof at it. (buying more and more faster, longer primes) but no matter how fast and long i got DoF on crop sensor cameras just sucks. Head and shoulders, it's gorgeous and creamy. At 3/4 length it's deteriorated to the point that i don't want the shot anymore. as Gareth and others have pointed out, Full Frame is the route to getting the look that you're after. Longer lenses, and distance to between subject and background also play a role in it, but FF brings it home. Do a goodle search for Full Frame fov and dof for some explanations of why this happens.
I just picked up the Nikon D600 and i'm now getting used to the FF dof characteristics. For the first time i feel like it's possible to have too little dof at portrait distances. Even as "wide" as f4 can be creamy and gorgeous.
trevis thomas said:
amelaj,Full Frame is the route to getting the look that you're after. Longer lenses, and distance to between subject and background also play a role in it, but FF brings it home.
if you want to go the whole hog get a Hasselblad and the 210mm f/4.0
( no I cant afford one ether)
trevisthomas said:
amelaj,You are feeling the pain and frustration that that drove me to Nikon. I'd been shooting and loving my pentax gear until getting serious about portrature last year. I tried to solve the problem by throwing dof at it. (buying more and more faster, longer primes) but no matter how fast and long i got DoF on crop sensor cameras just sucks. Head and shoulders, it's gorgeous and creamy. At 3/4 length it's deteriorated to the point that i don't want the shot anymore. as Gareth and others have pointed out, Full Frame is the route to getting the look that you're after. Longer lenses, and distance to between subject and background also play a role in it, but FF brings it home. Do a goodle search for Full Frame fov and dof for some explanations of why this happens.
I just picked up the Nikon D600 and i'm now getting used to the FF dof characteristics. For the first time i feel like it's possible to have too little dof at portrait distances. Even as "wide" as f4 can be creamy and gorgeous.
It might be easier with FX, but it isn't as impossible as you make it sound with DX. Might take a little technique, but doesn't all photography?
tcole1983 said:
It might be easier with FX, but it isn't as impossible as you make it sound with DX. Might take a little technique, but doesn't all photography?
Other than something like the Brenizer method (http://www.slrlounge.com/the-brenizer-method-ryan-brenizer-photography-tutorial) what else could be done to get a more shallow dof on a dx with enough fov to shoot head to toe? The fastest lens i ever shot is f1.4 and in a single dx frame the dof never really got me what i wanted at the distance needed for shooting a person full length. Are you thinking bokeh plugin's in post?
trevisthomas said:
Other than something like the Brenizer method (http://www.slrlounge.com/the-brenizer-method-ryan-brenizer-photography-tutorial) what else could be done to get a more shallow dof on a dx with enough fov to shoot head to toe? The fastest lens i ever shot is f1.4 and in a single dx frame the dof never really got me what i wanted at the distance needed for shooting a person full length. Are you thinking bokeh plugin's in post?
Nope...just the suggestions previously in this thread (although some are post processing options). It can be done with a lens though. Mostly being mindful of the distance to the background. It might not always be easy, but it can be done is all I am saying. The photographer the OP mentions does just that. All the body shots are outside in open areas where there is lots of distance behind them. Obviously it is easier for head or upper body shots when you can be closer to the subject, but it isn't impossible for a single body shot. If you have a group or something like that then it might make it near impossible or if you are inside, but that isn't the case that the OP was referring to in the photographer they pointed out.
The funny thing here is that tcole recently purchased the perfect lens for portraits on DX, the 300mm f4. Got try it with a model standing on a small hill and even a full body shot will have a wonderfully washed background.
SquamishPhoto said:
The funny thing here is that tcole recently purchased the perfect lens for portraits on DX, the 300mm f4. Got try it with a model standing on a small hill and even a full body shot will have a wonderfully washed background.
:) I have taken some of my daughter that have turned out pretty well with it.
Edit: And the 105 F2.8 seems to work very well I think...if you don't want to be in the next county while shooting ;)
SquamishPhoto said:
The funny thing here is that tcole recently purchased the perfect lens for portraits on DX, the 300mm f4. Got try it with a model standing on a small hill and even a full body shot will have a wonderfully washed background.
+1
This is where experience trumps assumptions. If you have the space to separate your subject, Telephotos are great - they slim the subject as well.
Too many new photographers stand too far away and don't pay attention to the background until they get home. Good Bokeh is achieved by being able to see in your mind what the photo will look like before you press the button. It is just being aware of the total environment.
Larger formats help for sure, but you can achieve excellent bokeh with even a digicam if you take the time to learn the system you are using. I think too many don't actually take the time to learn the system, and then assume moving to a larger format or a different lens will solve their dilemma. They are just tools. Dilemma resides in the person choosing to do what it takes to become a craftsman or continuing to be an apprentice.
You must log in to post.
