Page 25 - Fitting subjects into the frame

For this exercise, I chose one of the childrens' toys on the kitchen floor, to give a good contrast between the subject and the background. The sequence starts with an overall view of the train shot from a distance, before steadily moving closer. The focal length of the lens was kept the same throughout at ~50mm (35mm equiv).

The second image is the classic 'full frame' composition. Moving closer results in a more dramatic image, particularly image 4. Despite not showing the entire engine, the subject remains clear, leaving the brain to fill in the missing details.

This is the key learning point, that the implied image can be more captivating than the whole.

Exercise 3 - Varying shutter speeds to record movement

For this exercise, I chose a Newton's cradle placed on my black cloth background, illuminated by two tablelamps.

The camera was mounted on a tripod with the same 90mm macro lens as used before. The shutter speed varied from 6" in the first image to 1/60th second on the last image. The shutter speed was varied by varying the aperture rather than the lighting or sensitivity of the camera (ISO setting). Hence the depth of field will reduce from the first image to the last.

The first image was a blur. Apart from the cradle, all the balls were unrecognisable due to movement, even the strings had largely disappeared.

In the last image, the balls were broadly frozen with minimal movement visible. It looks slightly bizarre with the end ball defying gravity, but the brain is able to work out what is happening.

Of the intermediate images, only #4 shows what I would consider to be a successful combination of movement but with the balls recognisable for what they are. This image corresponded to a shutter speed of 1/15th second.

This exercise builds on the first two by demonstrating that middle settings for focal point, aperture and shutter speed can and need to be explored to get an image which accurately captures the impression that the photographer is trying to capture.

Prior to doing these exercises, I don't believe I gave these controls the attention they deserve, limiting myself to getting the exposure 'right'. Somehow I think that even this is about to be dissected....

Exercise 2 - Varying aperture to control depth of field

For this second exercise, I took the same setup with the same lens, and varied the aperture to control the depth of field recorded in the image. I started with the smallest available aperture, f22, and opened the lens in one stop intervals to wide open, f2.8. The corresponding shutter speed varied from 6" to 1/60th.

The longer exposures led to a reduced level of contrast and a brighter background than the images shot at a shorter shutter speed.

Almost all of the first image is in focus. As soon as the lens comes off minimum aperture, some blurring becomes apparent although the effect isn't obvious until image #3 onwards.

Similar to exercise one, the finger guide circles are a point of interest and identify the image as a guitar fingerboard. By the last image, both circles are blurred and the image loses its identity.

Of the images, #4 looks most pleasing. It has the clear 3 dimensional effect inherent in shallow depth of field, but does not loose its identity.

Prior to these two exercises, I took an extreme approach to aperture - smallest aperture, shutter speed permitting, to get everything in focus, widest aperture when I want to get selective focus.

Having done the exercises, I've learned that apertures should be controlled in a far more subtle manner for best effect and that intermediate settings can give a more attractive effect.

Project 1 - Focus

For my first project, I experimented with varying the focal point on the neck of the guitar, something I'd never tried before.

I set up the camera on a tripod and mounted a 90mm f2.8 macro lens, chosen to give minimal depth of field when used wide open. I illuminated the subject with two table lamps in order to achieve a shutter speed of around 1/60th.

I started focussing farest from the camera, and progressively shifted focus one fret at a time to the nearest point in the image.

The eye is led to the sharpest point of focus as expected. Where the focus is in the distance, the effect is unnatural - although the viewer can see what the subject is, it needs to start in the foreground to be able to infer the rest of the image.

It becomes apparent that the closest point of interest is the finger marker circle closest to the viewer. This needs to be in focus for maximum effect.

However, due to the shallow depth of field, it seems unnatural for the circle to be in focus in isolation, as in image #5. This might be appropriate for another subject, but here, I think the depth of field is just too shallow.

If I was to repeat this exercise, I think a slightly smaller aperture would be appropriate, to bring the foreground into focus, as well as the first circular finger marker, with the remainder of the image drift into a gradual blur whilst retaining a little more detail in the background.