Oh, I know of that method. Sort of simulates larger format sensor.
Cool stuff and I’ve wanted to experiment with it too. Jonesing for a tilt/shift lens for stuff like that and more.
TBH the bokeh on that photo looks like shit. It is so obviously artificial. The guy’s head looks like it was cropped out of a photo and inserted into a different photo by someone who was not that skilled at photoshop. Which is pretty much what happened I guess.
Fads gonna fad.
Kind of a shame because it is a good photo of the bike. If the photo was left well enough alone it would probably look miles better.
Look up his link. It’s not chopped.
idk, i’m not a fan. Looks kind of gimmicky, like when there’s too much HDR
Interesting, the process is a little less artificial than I first thought. (I thought the idea was to photograph the foreground and background separately.) The final effect still looks like crap in that pic, but then again photo nerds gonna experiment.
The other two you posted look fine to me.
tbh fuck the brenizer method in general. it can be pulled off sometimes, but most of the time it looks like garbage.
get a MF camera or larger if you want to be a bokehlord.
Why are we not talking about how the top tube of that bike is like four inches higher than that dudes dick?
Don’t worry, he slammed the seat so he’s good!
#slamthatseatpost
Dq: why is medium/large format better for narrow depth of field?
because the circle of confusion size is so much larger with larger sensor/film sizes. And to get the same field of view with a larger format, you need a longer lens, which will have a shallower DOF.
This ought to explain: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field#Relationship_of_DOF_to_format_size
(I’m a bit rusty on this, someone else can almost certainly explain it better)
Huh. I really wanted to switch to a small-format or micro 4/3 camera for bikepacking. But, I just wasn’t happy with the shots I got, even when I spent a lot of money on the smaller camera. There was always a gap that I could just barely detect. I bought a cheap, used D7000 and threw a cheap 35mm prime on it and got better shots than when I used a smaller camera 4x the cost.
Bummer, I wish there was a small camera that could do the heavy lifting. I’d invest. I know Prolly uses some small camera but I also know it costs more than everything I own combined, including my car.
I’m a big fan of my x100s, but i’m also not a good photographer
jsavoia has one too tho, and he has posted some rad pics shot with it
First thing to realize is that being able to do ultra-shallow DoF might be nice sometimes, but it’s not everything. Composition and exposure count for everything. There’s nothing wrong with a micro 4/3 camera, if you know how to use it. Personally (as someone who prefers medium format) I use a lumix lx100 for bike stuff. It’s micro 4/3 and produces excellent images. It doesn’t take up much space, and it does most of what I actually need from a camera.
So, what I’m trying to say is don’t buy into the hype that you need a full-frame or even interchangeable lens camera to get great shots.
Given that people are taking awesome shots with all sorts of smartphone cameras, I think that’s a given. Big cameras are for photo nerds and people who make a living from this shit.
[quote=kmcdon]
So, what I’m trying to say is don’t buy into the hype that you need a full-frame or even interchangeable lens camera to get great shots.[/quote]
Pretty much. I like the added flexibility a full-frame and fast prime give you, but there’s a much larger world of photography that doesn’t require it. Heck I do most of my shots with my phone and use that opportunity to have gobs of DOF.
I was in Yosemite last week and I saw hundreds of dorks with tens of thousands of dollars worth of camera gear each all clustered up to take the same exact photos as everyone else.
Right off the road.
Sorry guys, you’re not gonna be the next Ansel Adams twenty five feet from the parking area.
I like DOF stuff for shooting bikes. There’s inherently a lot of macro. It’s not that I feel like I need some D90 full-frame to do the job, it’s just that the cheaper (and heavier, and larger, and more annoying) big camera seemed like it excelled more than the 4/3.
It’s a little hard to explain because it’s so detail-oriented, but I don’t regret the switch. Until I’m packing and realize I haven’t found a place for the camera… But yeah, I went back and forth between the two formats twice in the last three years, and I think I’m done switching. My next camera is a D7200, after the price drops.
