Post Your Pets!

[Ade]

Test post to see if this works, (Newbie), i

[Ade]

OK, that worked, heres some more;


New dog Ripley


[IMG][View:http://i800.photobucket.com/albums/yy288/charliecheese_photos/IMG_8111.jpg][/IMG]


Sugden again


[IMG][View:http://i800.photobucket.com/albums/yy288/charliecheese_photos/2009_Sugden_18_wks4-3.jpg][/IMG]


[IMG][View:http://i800.photobucket.com/albums/yy288/charliecheese_photos/Sug2.jpg][/IMG]

[George Slusher]

The first photo of Sugden and the shot of Ripley are nice. They

[Ragnar]

Ade, I really love your shots incredible! Very nice breed on the dogs too.

[Ade]

Thanks for your comments guys, The huge nose pics were deliberate (If any of you read my recent post on "what lens do i need for full body dog portraits" i mentioned exactly that effect, fair point on perspective though, but with a wide angle i think you do tend to get close up without rearlising it), I used a wide angle, but they are quite quirky, the first 2 were with a 100mm 2.8L IS with my 5d mk1, I have more if anyone is interested


They are both Whippets , Ripley (after Ripley from Aliens) is only 11 weeks.

[Ade]

Sugden again


[IMG][View:http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg12/pinkeye69/2011_Feb_Sugden2.jpg][/IMG]

[Andy Stringer]

It's NOT the focal length that is the problem, but the perspective

I agree with everything else you said, George, but this puzzled me. I thought that perspective was a consequence offocal length and subject distance. You can't get a perspective like the last shot [of the first post on this page] with a longer focal length. I accept Ade's point that the perspective was deliberate, perhaps so that the whole shadow could be included, so it isn't necessarily a problem, but I agree that it can sometimes be undesirable. I like the perspective in this case, but I think the depth of field wasn't quite enough to get the nose sharp.

I have more if anyone is interested

Ade, welcome to the forums. Of course we're interested, why else would we be looking at this thread?[]

[Steve U]

Welcome Ade, please post some more, as an owner of a Whippet and three Italian Grayhounds, I love the breed and enjoy the different perspectives.


Steve

[czeano]

A friend is fostering some pups from the pound. They're all to be adopted within the next week. I got a chance to snap some pictures the other afternoon right at magic hour.


All shots are 7D + 70-200/2.8 IS mk1, ISO 800, f/4.5 or 5.6, Luck @ 98%, uncropped


-Chris


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/15/7183.dog2_2D00_500.jpg[/img]


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/15/8551.dog3_2D00_500.jpg[/img]


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/15/4370.dog1_2D00_500.jpg[/img]

[George Slusher]

Perspective has nothing to do with focal length. Consider this: artists have to deal with perspective, but the concept of "focal length" is meaningless to them. Da Vinci was a master of perspective, but he died about 90 years before the telescope was invented.


Also consider this: what is a "telephoto" focal length for a 35mm camera (e.g., 100mm) may be a "normal" lens or even "wide angle" for a larger format camera (e.g., 2x2, 6cmx6cm, 4x5). For example, the lens on a Yashica 124 6x6 twin lens reflex is 80mm, but it has about the same field of view/magnification as a 45-50mm lens on a 35mm camera. (Both are considered "normal" lenses--neither wide-angle nor telephoto.


You can see this, yourself, in several ways. One way would be to sit with your eyes closed and have someone come very close to you--1-2 ft. Stare straight ahead and open ONE eye. You should see the same sort of image as in the photos, for a while. (It might work even better if you look through a short tube, like a toilet paper roll.) The idea is to remove the clues that your brain normally gets to judge distance and depth and then to flatten the image.


Another way is to use a zoom lens and take a series of photos of the same subject--preferably something with depth fairly close, with the camera fixed, at different focal lengths. Then, crop the photos so that they all contain the same part of the image and scale them so that they all have the same pixel dimensions. You'll find that the perspective is exactly the same. I've actually done this, but it was at a very long distance with a Canon 100-400mm lens, so any difference might be harder to see. Here they are. One was taken at 100mm, the other at 400mm--a factor of 4 in focal length. Which is the 100mm image--without looking at the EXIF data, which was preserved?











If I have time tomorrow or Wednesday, I'll try to do the same thing with my 15-85mm lens. To be strictly accurate, one should also adjust the aperture to keep the depth of field the same--and the shutter speed to keep the exposure the same. (Depth of field for a particular camera depends upon aperture and the size of an object on the sensor--i.e., on the combination of focal length and distance. A 100mm lens will have the same depth of field at a distance of 10 ft as a 50mm lens does at 5 ft, with the same aperture. See the
DOFMaster online depth-of-field calculator. (He also has apps for iOS and Android and Palm OS, which I have on my Palm TX.)


What DOES focal length "do," then? It determines the magnification or field of view, which essentially measure the same thing, as long as you're talking about a fixed image size--e.g., the camera sensor or the film frame. A telephoto lens does just what a telescope does: it has a narrow field of view which it magnifies to a standard sensor/film dimension. A "wide angle" lens has a wider field of view, which it compresses to fit that standard sensor or film frame.


The focal length thus determines the "framing"--how much of the scene is in the photo. You should choose the distance (and angles, etc) to get the perspective you want, then use the focal length to get the framing (what is and is not in the photo) you want. If you move (any way--forward/back, right/left, up/down, the perspective will change, but not with focal length. (THis was a major point in the weekend Nikon School of Photography seminar I attended in about 1979.)


So, yes , you can get the same perspective as the last shot with a
telephoto lens, as long as it will focus close enough. You just won't
see as much of the dog's face.


What is considered a "normal" perspective is somewhat cultural, especially when dealing with people. Americans tend to be most comfortable at a separation of 4-6 feet or so, but some other cultures treat lesser or longer distances as "normal." (Watch people talking to each other and see how far apart they stand.) This is why Americans think of an 85mm lens (35mm equivalent--that's about 53mm on a Canon 1.6 field of view crop factor camera like the XXD, 7D, and XXXDs) as a "portrait" lens. That will fill a 35mm frame with a person's head and shoulders at about 6 feet.