Student Photographer needs technical advice

Hey there -- This is my first post. I am a student photographer at
University of South Florida -- St Petersburg.

Later today I'll get the chance to make photos of juveniles at an area
correctional facility. They are puppy-raisers for a guide dog school
in this area.. If you've seen Animal Planet's "Cell Dogs" you
understand what I'm talking about.

I am assigned to make a photo essay -- and -- one portrait. Since
these are juveniles -- I can't photograph their faces.. I can,
however, photo the guide dog representative, and maybe a guard -- if
they give permission.

I thought I'd try a silhouette shot for the portrait. I could use some
technical advice about shooting silhouettes.

I have a brand new Canon Digital Rebel. I own a 50 mm lens, a 70-300mm
lens; and a 24mm wide angle lens. I do not own any other equipment.
(That was expensive enough for now!)

I am also having issues reaching deep depth of field in bright
sunlight -- so far I can only achieve it using my telephoto lens.

If any of you have time to offer advice -- I'd really appreciate it. I
still can't believe that I've been given permission to be in a PRISON.
I leave to shoot the assignment in 2.5 hours.. I'll stay on this site
reading responses till them..
_________________


Gina in Florida

On 18 Nov 2004 08:18:12 -0800, (E-Mail Removed) (Gina in
Florida) wrote:

>Hey there -- This is my first post. I am a student photographer at
>University of South Florida -- St Petersburg.
>
>Later today I'll get the chance to make photos of juveniles at an area
>correctional facility. They are puppy-raisers for a guide dog school
>in this area.. If you've seen Animal Planet's "Cell Dogs" you
>understand what I'm talking about.
>
>I am assigned to make a photo essay -- and -- one portrait. Since
>these are juveniles -- I can't photograph their faces.. I can,
>however, photo the guide dog representative, and maybe a guard -- if
>they give permission.
>
>I thought I'd try a silhouette shot for the portrait. I could use some
>technical advice about shooting silhouettes.
>
>I have a brand new Canon Digital Rebel. I own a 50 mm lens, a 70-300mm
>lens; and a 24mm wide angle lens. I do not own any other equipment.
>(That was expensive enough for now!)
>
>I am also having issues reaching deep depth of field in bright
>sunlight -- so far I can only achieve it using my telephoto lens.

First you should be asking your instructor, thats what they get paid
for. As for reacing depth of field, sounds like you don't know what
depth of field is. Depth of field has nothing to do with the lens,
and all to do with apature. The smaller the apature the larger the
depth of field. So what is depth of field? It is the distance in
front of and behind the point of critical focus, that is in acceptable
foucs (it looks like its in focus to the human eye).

On 18 Nov 2004 08:18:12 -0800, (E-Mail Removed) (Gina in Florida)
wrote:

>Hey there -- This is my first post. I am a student photographer at
>University of South Florida -- St Petersburg.
>
>Later today I'll get the chance to make photos of juveniles at an area
>correctional facility. They are puppy-raisers for a guide dog school
>in this area.. If you've seen Animal Planet's "Cell Dogs" you
>understand what I'm talking about.
>
>I am assigned to make a photo essay -- and -- one portrait. Since
>these are juveniles -- I can't photograph their faces.. I can,
>however, photo the guide dog representative, and maybe a guard -- if
>they give permission.
>
>I thought I'd try a silhouette shot for the portrait. I could use some
>technical advice about shooting silhouettes.

Interesting.
Hmm, if you can, get a great backthat is really brightly light, or
over light it. Then set the camera to meter off the extremely bright
background. Have the "kids" stand in front, or kneeling down.. no flash.
They should silhouette pretty good I would think.
All on a tripod.
Don't move anything.
Shoot the dogs, with flash, near the 'kids' positions, and layer the
2 images, to get good pics of dogs, with sil's of the 'kids'

sounds like you don't know what
> depth of field is. Depth of field has nothing to do with the lens,
> and all to do with apature.

Actually it sounds like the student knows more than you do.
You don't realize that the FOCAL length of the lens also determines
the amount of depth of field? Such as a WIDE angle lens has much
more DOF than a TELEPHOTO one. Isn't that why most portrait
photographers use moderate TELEPHOTO lens because it
gives them better DEPTH OF FIELD???

"Steven Wandy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:jsfnd.8061$(E-Mail Removed)...
> sounds like you don't know what
> > depth of field is. Depth of field has nothing to do with the lens,
> > and all to do with apature.
>
> Actually it sounds like the student knows more than you do.
> You don't realize that the FOCAL length of the lens also determines
> the amount of depth of field? Such as a WIDE angle lens has much
> more DOF than a TELEPHOTO one. Isn't that why most portrait
> photographers use moderate TELEPHOTO lens because it
> gives them better DEPTH OF FIELD???
>
>
No, portrait photographers use moderate telephoto lenses to minimize
distortion (caused mainly by being too close) and to allow them to fill the
frame while keeping the subject more comfortable. Also the less depth of
field of the telephoto lens (compared to a "normal") helps to control the
background.

And for what it's worth, he's right in saying that depth of field has
nothing to do with the lens (mostly right anyway). Depth of field is
controlled by the actual opening of the lens and the relative size of the
image on the negative to the subject (assuming the same print sizes). If you
take a wide angle lens and fill the frame with your subject then fill the
frame with the same subject using a telephoto lens and print both pictures
to the same sizee you'll have the same depth of field in both shots. If you
fill the frame with your subject using a telephoto lens then switch to a
wide angle lens but DON'T move the camera or the subject then you'll see a
much greater depth of field with the wide angle lens because the image of
the subject will be much smaller on the negative the the image shot with the
telephoto lens.

Jeffery S. Harrison

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 05:24:31 GMT, "Steven Wandy" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

> sounds like you don't know what
>> depth of field is. Depth of field has nothing to do with the lens,
>> and all to do with apature.
>
>Actually it sounds like the student knows more than you do.
>You don't realize that the FOCAL length of the lens also determines
>the amount of depth of field? Such as a WIDE angle lens has much
>more DOF than a TELEPHOTO one. Isn't that why most portrait
>photographers use moderate TELEPHOTO lens because it
>gives them better DEPTH OF FIELD???


The focal length has no effect, its all distance from subject.
Portrait photographers use a medium telephoto so they don't get
distortion and have a good working distance from the subject.

I realize that they use short telephoto lens to fill the frame without
getting into the face of the model (which would cause distortion if using a
wide angle lens), but you can't tell me that any particular aperture on a
wide angle lens would give the same depth of field as that same aperture on
a telephoto lens? I realize that aperture and lens to subject distance have
larger effects on DOF, but the focal length of the lens being used also
effects it.

I realize that they use short telephoto lens to fill the frame without
getting into the face of the model (which would cause distortion if using a
wide angle lens), but you can't tell me that any particular aperture on a
wide angle lens would give the same depth of field as that same aperture on
a telephoto lens? I realize that aperture and lens to subject distance have
larger effects on DOF, but the focal length of the lens being used also
effects it.

In message <jsfnd.8061$(E-Mail Removed)>,
"Steven Wandy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> sounds like you don't know what
>> depth of field is. Depth of field has nothing to do with the lens,
>> and all to do with apature.
>
>Actually it sounds like the student knows more than you do.
>You don't realize that the FOCAL length of the lens also determines
>the amount of depth of field? Such as a WIDE angle lens has much
>more DOF than a TELEPHOTO one. Isn't that why most portrait
>photographers use moderate TELEPHOTO lens because it
>gives them better DEPTH OF FIELD???

There are a number of ways to look at it, but one very simple and
important thing to remember is that (all other things being equal), two
images with the same subject size in the frame and the same f-stop will
have the same DOF.

You don't get greater DOF by moving closer to your subject and using a
shorter focal length lens!

The same subject taken at the same f-stop with a 100mm lens instead of a
400mm lens, from 1/4 the distance, will have the same DOF.

You choose the focal length by how close you want to be to the subject,
what kind of perspective you want, and how much camera shake the FL can
handle.


--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

In message <PBrnd.18278$(E-Mail Removed)>,
"Steven Wandy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I realize that they use short telephoto lens to fill the frame without
>getting into the face of the model (which would cause distortion if using a
>wide angle lens), but you can't tell me that any particular aperture on a
>wide angle lens would give the same depth of field as that same aperture on
>a telephoto lens? I realize that aperture and lens to subject distance have
>larger effects on DOF, but the focal length of the lens being used also
>effects it.

.... not with the same f-stop and subject size on the recording medium.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><