# Does this DoF work in this image?



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

I'm just not sure.


----------



## Jeremy Z (Feb 6, 2012)

I think so. I like it.


----------



## rexbobcat (Feb 6, 2012)

I just don't like the blurred bulb in the immediate foreground. It's so large in the frame compared to the bulbs that are in focus, it just distracts me. I think it would have worked better if the bulb was in the same spot, but closer to the other bulbs.

With the current focus that you have now, your DoF would have to be really deep in order to get everything in focus. I don't think this is an issue of DoF - it seems like it's more of a focus thing...


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

Thanks Jeremy!

Rex, so you don't like the focus placed on the middle 3, and it would be better on the foreground bulbs?


----------



## EIngerson (Feb 6, 2012)

I agree with Rex.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 6, 2012)

It is interesting in the way it draws the eye around to the different bulbs... size / brightness here, sharp focus there... interesting....


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 6, 2012)

The closest lamp should be the most in-focus.


----------



## mishele (Feb 6, 2012)

What was your reasoning behind putting the focus on that light?


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

mishele said:


> What was your reasoning behind putting the focus on that light?



To challenge the viewer. The first and last bulbs are OOF, going against what everyone else would do, and focus on the first thing in front of them letting the latter bulbs fall OOF. It's commentary against social norms.


----------



## mishele (Feb 6, 2012)

But....but....didn't you break some kinda rule to do that?!!


----------



## Bossy (Feb 6, 2012)

I get the want to challange, but I don't think its quite so much a social norm as it is just uncomfortable for the eye to look at. I keep wanting to look at the center one, since its the biggest, there's not much more to it than that. Its a super interesting pic in itself though for just being lightbulbs.


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 6, 2012)

NO it's doesnt work.The depth of field is too shallow and it was shot at f22 and that he needed to step back and crop more.Here is why. He was  near maxed on aperture and still didnt get the right depth of field.Which means he needed a shorter focal length ............or to be further back from the subject to achieve the proper depth of field without diffraction which began to efftect the image once he passed f16


----------



## mishele (Feb 6, 2012)

lol....or he wanted you to feel uncomfortable....


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 6, 2012)

mishele said:


> lol....or he wanted you to feel uncomfortable....



Damn
How did she come up with that?
BlackRose you been studying.
Jesus


----------



## EIngerson (Feb 6, 2012)

I just can't get past the closest bulb. I'm very symmetric minded and it's messing with me.


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 6, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> mishele said:
> 
> 
> > lol....or he wanted you to feel uncomfortable....
> ...


Umm thanks.... Lol


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 6, 2012)

EIngerson said:


> I just can't get past the closest bulb. I'm very symmetric minded and it's messing with me.




Agreed. But I'm staying out of this one.


----------



## rexbobcat (Feb 6, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Thanks Jeremy!
> 
> Rex, so you don't like the focus placed on the middle 3, and it would be better on the foreground bulbs?



It wouldn't bother me as much if the OOF bulb wasn't so large in the frame, and feels like it's encroaching on the space of the other bulbs. It kind of makes me feel like I'm having to look through the bulb to see the scene.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

So, Blackrose thinks this was random, and not deliberate. Ok.

Why do all bulbs have to be in focus?


----------



## EIngerson (Feb 6, 2012)

That's what impresses me about the image. You targeted a window of DOF. Something that happens in every photo, but to employ it with a purpose? I think that's cool.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

Eric there's also that thing where westerners are uncomfortable with foreground blur.

Also smaller apertures yield that diffraction starburst, which I think is just right here.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 6, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks Jeremy!
> ...



Entirely appropriate if it is meant to be social commentary.... and would have been even more significant that large intruding bulb was dimmer than the rest... but that would be getting a bit too obvious. And then again, I could be interpreting this incorrectly too.....


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 6, 2012)

Because bitter, the bulbs are the main subject.To target the depth of field between the first bulb and the last bulb takes away from the viewers sense of perception.


----------



## o hey tyler (Feb 6, 2012)

The image itself is quite simple which I think is
Reminiscent of early photography. Also the
Old lights really lend to the message behind this
Lovely image. 
Leaning slightly to the right, the photograph

Handles the motion with
Acute grace; making the scene 
Really stand out in my mind.
Do you mind telling me the site you used to host it? It kept the
Exif data which is also really helpful. 
Really like to know, thanks.


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 6, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> Because bitter, the bulbs are the main subject.To target the depth of field between the first bulb and the last bulb takes away from the viewers sense of perception.



Gipson are you behind this?
How is she coming up with this stuff if you're not?

Rose you gotta quit picking on Bitter.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

So the end all, be all, is to have all the bulbs in focus?

I dunno, seems a rather formulaic and simplistic view.


----------



## mishele (Feb 6, 2012)

EIngerson said:


> That's what impresses me about the image. You targeted a window of DOF. Something that happens in every photo, but to employ it with a purpose? I think that's cool.



There should be purpose in every shot..........


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 6, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> So the end all, be all, is to have all the bulbs in focus?
> 
> I dunno, seems a rather formulaic and simplistic view.



Not to mention boring!


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

LightSpeed, she's  not picking. She's challenging my view and I am challenging hers. Isn't that why we are all here, in the beginners forum? To learn from each other with healthy debate?

Tyler, Flickr.


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 6, 2012)

Ok Bitter, let me ask you this. Is this something you would get printed and hang on your wall? Or expect anyone else to?


----------



## Bossy (Feb 6, 2012)

Not to get off subject, but I've tried flickr and it errors. HTML or direct link?

And I agree, all in focus would be dull. Maybe a different arrangement or even simply only having the first couple in focus. Who knows.


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 6, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> Ok Bitter, let me ask you this. Is this something you would get printed and hang on your wall? Or expect anyone else to?




Oh shyt.

this stuff is hittin the fan now.


Gipson I know you're behind this.


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 6, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> LightSpeed, she's  not picking. She's challenging my view and I am challenging hers. Isn't that why we are all here, in the beginners forum? To learn from each other with healthy debate?
> 
> Tyler, Flickr.




I'm staying out of it.


----------



## mishele (Feb 6, 2012)

Photo got an emotional response from people = win


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 6, 2012)

Why do you keep saying Gipson behind this? Did I miss something.....


----------



## e.rose (Feb 6, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> Ok Bitter, let me ask you this. Is this something you would get printed and hang on your wall? Or expect anyone else to?



*I* would print it and hang it on my wall.

Love it Bitter.

I'm totally in love with your DOF... I love the tension you created by placing the focus where you did.

I loved it before I realized there was an ulterior motive for this thread... it's still pretty damn cool though.


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 6, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> Why do you keep saying Gipson behind this? Did I miss something.....



HOW THE HELL ARE YOU COMING UP WITH THIS SHYT?
This is Bitter. This isn't just some chump photographer.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

Bossy said:


> Not to get off subject, but I've tried flickr and it errors. HTML or direct link?
> 
> And I agree, all in focus would be dull. Maybe a different arrangement or even simply only having the first couple in focus. Who knows.



I go in and select out the direct link from the BBCode link. Because with the iPad update you can no longer copy and paste the image 

As far as arrangement, it was there. I studied the arrangement and decided on this. I did want to move them. LOL


----------



## rexbobcat (Feb 6, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Eric there's also that thing where westerners are uncomfortable with foreground blur.
> 
> Also smaller apertures yield that diffraction starburst, which I think is just right here.



I'm just not really a huge fan of going against the flow just for the sake of it.

And if a photo's metaphor has to be explained in order to be understood, then it just doesn't work.


----------



## blackrose89 (Feb 6, 2012)

Umm Bitter, you didnt answer my last question....


----------



## mishele (Feb 6, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Eric there's also that thing where westerners are uncomfortable with foreground blur.
> ...



Oh it was understood.......it made us all uncomfortable. Which in your case made you not like the shot.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> blackrose89 said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you keep saying Gipson behind this? Did I miss something.....
> ...



I'm no expert. I do what I do. I do things the way I see them. She's asking good questions. And there are no right or wrong answers.
I made choices, and best I can do is explain the. We are all better for the banter in the end, are we not?

As far as expecting someone to purchase it and hang it on there wall? You betchur booties!


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 6, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> LightSpeed said:
> 
> 
> > blackrose89 said:
> ...



I agree with you wholeheartedly.
And you know I do because you know how I am when I get called out.
Though we don't really know each other.

But here's the thing. She asked if YOU would print it out and hang it on your wall.
I would like to see the answer to that for this very reason. I know how critical you are on your own works.


----------



## e.rose (Feb 6, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> Umm Bitter, you didnt answer my last question....



Why does he have to answer it?  I just did.

If I had more than $5 in my pocket, I would message him right now to find out what size prints I could get from him to hang on the bare, bare walls of my apartment.

He could sell it.

Someone would buy it.

Like me.

I have a feeling that Mish might dig it too.


----------



## rexbobcat (Feb 6, 2012)

mishele said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > Bitter Jeweler said:
> ...



He said it's commentary against social norms. All I see is different for the sake of being different. Maybe it's the way he worded it. It just doesn't seem as profound as it was probably supposed to be represented.

And I've taken several shots that fall into the category of "making photo people uncomfortable", but that doesn't make them any great stroke of genius. If a budding photographer who is not respected on this site took this shot, it would have been ripped to shreds compositionally.

It's kind of like if I painted a picture of a triangle and a square it would be seen as pretentious and boring, but when Kazimir Malevich did it, it was regarded as art.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

*pffft* I don't have room to hang my work. Our house is filled with art.

If I'm being asked how much I like my own work? It's always getting better, and it's never quite there. *shrug*


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 6, 2012)

e.rose said:


> blackrose89 said:
> 
> 
> > Umm Bitter, you didnt answer my last question....
> ...




Hold up babe.
And you know I love you like sista......because you're married and all.

I asked him a question and I'd like to see the answer.
Of course Rose asked it first, but nonetheless.

Know what I mean babe?


----------



## e.rose (Feb 6, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> Hold up babe.
> And you know I love you like sista......because you're married and all.


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 6, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> *pffft* I don't have room to hang my work. Our house is filled with art.
> 
> If I'm being asked how much I like my own work? It's always getting better, and it's never quite there. *shrug*



Same as mine.
But that's not the question.
I'll ask again. Would you have this printed and hang it on your wall?
You don't have to dignify me with a reply but I feel it's a fair question since you both called each other out.
It's like you said..............and informative debate.

You asked a question , posted it to a topic, it got answered. You then asked other questions that were answered.
Can you not answer this one?

Nothing but respect dude.
I mean no harm here.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 6, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Eric there's also that thing where westerners are uncomfortable with foreground blur.
> ...



There are museums, and museums, and museums,  chock full of work that need explanation.


----------



## Bossy (Feb 6, 2012)

MoMA is a good example of things that make you go WTF.


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 7, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> There are museums, and museums, and museums,  chock full of work that need explanation.





You've moved away from the question, sir.
This tells me much.
With respect I asked a very valid question that you conveniently overlooked.
With all due respect, I know why.

The fan club, however, backed up what you do not feel you need to.
I feel that you knew better than to answer, " yes" to blackroses question.

You appear to be fairly OWNED on this one.

Stay tuned for the grand finally


----------



## Bossy (Feb 7, 2012)

LS...he said up above that he doesn't hang his art. How is that not an answer?

Note that this coming from someone who is too noob to be in anyones fan club...


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 7, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > *pffft* I don't have room to hang my work. Our house is filled with art.
> ...



Yes, if I had a space for it. 
But I may hang work in a different way than you.

If my dining room were different, I'd print this LARGE and put it on the wall at the end of the table, and I would hang similar bare bulb fixtures above the table. I mean, cant you just see it? The bulbs in focus could appear to be similar in size to my actual lights, and then there's that big OOF one just to **** with you. 
I could also design and decorate a bathroom living room, kitchen, or bar around that image. 

I like art to fit a space, not just fill space on a wall.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 7, 2012)

hahaha.. LS is pulling a "Bitter" on Bitter! That is funny! The old "keep asking the question, over and over again"!   

I am nuetral here.. so keep it above the belt, gentlemen! No gouging, biting or other fouls will be tolerated!


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 7, 2012)

Bossy said:


> LS...he said up above that he doesn't hang his art. How is that not an answer?
> 
> Note that this coming from someone who is too noob to be in anyones fan club...



No disrespect intended Bossy.
He avoided the question like the plague.
Only he knows why........though he has admitted that BlackRose put him in a corner.
Never have seen this happen before. He's a fairly bright guy and good with a camera.
Rose, she's just a beginner who just got her first camera. She's fared quite well in this. Against the odds.

I'm just giving HIM time to answer MY question.
Again, I hold you in high regard. No disrespect.


----------



## rexbobcat (Feb 7, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > Bitter Jeweler said:
> ...



And there are gigabytes and gigabytes, and gigabytes of images that fall into the same category of yours.

I just don't find your image aesthetically coherent.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 7, 2012)

Ummm, I'm not in any corner. But if you need me to be, so be it.


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 7, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> hahaha.. LS is pulling a "Bitter" on Bitter!  That is funny! The old "keep asking the question, over and over again"!
> 
> I am nuetral here.. so keep it above the belt, gentlemen! No gouging, biting or other fouls will be tolerated!




You aint seen nothin yet son.
You see Gipson, I'm well aware of why this entire episode transpired.
Rose didn't have anything to do with it.

I did. We all know that , don't we?
You know me Gipson, better than anyone here.
lol
You know most of my entire story.
You KNOW how I am.
lol

Yall want drama? I've faced adversity in my time. In way more than one way. In the ring, out of the ring and on a death bed.
Only  to make a bigtime comeback with my second chance. I hope for all of  you.......that in your lifetimes that you are as fortunate as I've been.
Not just to breathe, but to become successful at anything you want to do in life.

Now, I'll lay that bit to rest and move on.

I have nothing but respect for Mr. Jeweler.
I've seen his work, I think he's good. I also think that this is a guy much like me who is passionate about photography.
And you, and many here watching this. I'm not trying to pick on the dude, but I'm gonna kill this with the next post.
And then hopefully we all move on, shake hands or come out fighting, either way it don't matter to me.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 7, 2012)

of anticipation.


----------



## jake337 (Feb 7, 2012)

Only thing bugging me is the front bulb overlapping one of the other bulbs cord and one of the in focus bulbs being tilted and blocked by another one.  Just me though.  My mind wants them all to hang individually.  


Did someone say something about this going against social norm?  I didn't know it was against social norm to use the DOF you want to.


----------



## LightSpeed (Feb 7, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Yes, if I had a space for it.
> But I may hang work in a different way than you.
> 
> If my dining room were different, I'd print this LARGE and put it on the  wall at the end of the table, and I would hang similar bare bulb  fixtures above the table. I mean, cant you just see it? The bulbs in  focus could appear to be similar in size to my actual lights, and then  there's that big OOF one just to **** with you.
> ...





Bitter Jeweler said:


> Ummm, I'm not in any corner. But if you need me to be, so be it.



You were asked a direct question. Which usually requires a direct answer.
You danced all around it. Came up with an excuse about having room, which had nothing to do with the question.
Now before I continue, I want you to know that I know, why you and Mishele went off tonight.
I don't post to beginners to offend anyone. I don't do it to be mean or nasty. I'm just here to have a good time with people who have common interests be they beginners or pro's.
I'm not trying to start a shytstorm here. I'm justa  guy with a camera having a good time.
I don't mean to offend anyone. I don't expect everyone to be like me and I have enough haters.
When you're as good looking as me, that happens.
Sad but true. Just thought I'd throw that in there.

Now, when you get ready to have this image printed let me know..........I'll charge you half what anyone does ( this is where you stepped in it) mount on anything you want, any size you want.
But we both know that aint gonna happen.

BlackRose........she had nothing to do with it.
All the questions were mine.
The critique.....mine.

The printing question.......mine. 
All she did was ask me how...........and I told her.
You see, she's only a beginner. Much like me.

You guys can blame me for everything she typed in here. All of it.
Mine.

I wasn't gonna let her take a beating because we're buddies, and that's what buddies do.
The rest of the stuff she's typed had nothing to do with me............but this did.

Am I proud of myself? Nah, I'm just a guy with a camera having a good time. Usually at my own expense.
I mean no harm to anyone here. Maybe I've discredited myself here with this, but that's ok with me.
I can handle it. Maybe make another comeback. Who knows?
So here's an idea.

Maybe we can ALL let it be.
Start over and get on the right foot with each other.

I'm only here to have a good time and learn from you guys, maybe make a friend or two.
Or 20 or however many I can. You can be one of em if you want. I don't mind. In fact, I'd welcome it. Same goes for tyler.
In the end, I'm just a guy with a camera. So I'll let you guys make that call.

Don't fault Rose for this.
I engineered it.
And you know, she'd probably start over too.

So there it is.

Yes sir,
I am LightSpeed alright.


----------



## rexbobcat (Feb 7, 2012)

This is off-topic, but is there some kind of rite of passage that photographers have to go through before they can stop being self-deprecating? I'm honestly curious.


----------



## EIngerson (Feb 7, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> This is off-topic, but is there some kind of rite of passage that photographers have to go through before they can stop being self-deprecating? I'm honestly curious.



Yes, you have to have 1,000 likes.


----------



## pgriz (Feb 7, 2012)

There are two streams of thought here... Either we like a photo because it conforms to what "we" like to see, or we like it because it makes us see what we would otherwise not have seen.

We expect to see the foreground sharp, especially if it is prominent. If it isnt then its either because of user error, or misplaced esthetics, or purpose. In this case, there is purpose. 

The visual elements line up both as a diagonal, and as repeating vertical elements. Size implies depth, reinforced by the OOF foreground bulb, and back (leftmost) bulb. The fact that the bulbs dont line up in a straight row creates some visual tension, as does the placement of the foreground bulb just off center. The slight angling of the picture relative to the vertical (the cords are not perfectly vertical) also creates a bit of tension. Yet the background elements, barely seen, show the lines as horizontal.

What Im on the fence about, is the amount of background still visible. It pulls my attention from the arrangement of the bulbs, to wanting to know more about what the place is and its story. The lights are a teaser, giving us some immediate eye candy, but the background invites us to ask for more.

As you can probably tell, I really like the image.


----------



## DY3VERSITY (Feb 7, 2012)

I'm not an expert or anything, but as soon as I saw the picture my eyes just went straight to that bulb that was out of focus.


----------



## One2 (Feb 7, 2012)

A little late to the game but I like the photograph.  Nice control over DOF.


----------



## TamiAz (Feb 7, 2012)

I'm always amazed at the amount of drama on this board!! I visit quite a few boards and this one takes the cake in DRAMA!! :thumbup:


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 7, 2012)

LightSpeed said:


> BlackRose........she had nothing to do with it.
> All the questions were mine.
> The critique.....mine.



YOU DOG! You were blaming it all on me ! lol!  



LightSpeed said:


> Gipson I know you're behind this.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 7, 2012)

TamiAz said:


> I'm always amazed at the amount of drama on this board!! I visit quite a few boards and this one takes the cake in DRAMA!! :thumbup:



Fun.. ain't it! lol!


----------



## Joey_Ricard (Feb 7, 2012)

I like it, background being as you presented it leaves a little to the imagination as to where it is or where it goes without seeing too much detail.


----------



## Infinite_Day (Feb 7, 2012)

This may sound confusing but I think the reason that the image is successful is because I _can't _decide if I like it or not. I like the composition but I'm just not sold on the DOF one way or the other. The organized, tidy part of my brain says that the focus should lead you through the natural DOF of the subjects. The other, distracted part of my brain thinks the image is interesting because you have to think about it for a second to appreciate it. If I had an area in my house that suited such an image, I would put it on the wall. It's a bit too modern for my more rusitc tastes though I could probably make it work somewhere.


----------



## Overread (Feb 7, 2012)

I'm not cherry picking through this mess to try and salvage - Bitter feel free to repost the photo in a new thread if you so desire to continue - anyone caught starting/causing drama thereafter on this issue will be up for a time out.


----------

