Circles and lines. Hmm…
There’s a little something in photography called Depth of Field. It refers to how much of a space there is between the nearest and farthest objects in a photograph that is sharply focused. A photographer may choose to have a large depth of field in order to keep everything in focus, or choose a small depth of field in order to allow a great deal of the photo to be out of focus. How you manipulate your aperture will determine how much of your photo is in focus, and, therefore, how large or small your depth of field is.
One strange this for me, however, is how a small aperture – say, f8 or above – may feel unfocused even though more of the photo is in sharp focus. Take the photo above, for instance. It was shot at f8. It is mostly sharp. It does, however, challenge me to decide on what subject to focus my attention. Should I pay attention to the bright and perplexing graffiti on the wall? Or maybe the strange artwork, wherein some…thing…seems to be trying to pry its way out of the wall? Or perhaps I should pay attention to the broken toilet and discarded shopping cart. By shooting it all in focus, I’ve created too many subjects and, therefore, created an unfocused, but sharp, photo.
What do you think?
Yeah, I’ve got nothing to go with that title. There’s just a hotel…and a pond…and a reflection of the hotel in the pond. So…do you like it?
I am decidedly literal on this one. The sun was out, shockingly, as I was on my commute home and I found that shooting straight into the sun meant two things: one, if I cranked up the aperture I got this cool star shape out of the sun; and two, I couldn’t see very well for a few minutes and that meant I had to sit in the car until I could see out of both eyes.
I like the way the clouds look painted on. I’ve never shot directly into the sun, but I like the way this turned out.
What do you think?