You know, Mike,
Quite frequently, the most wonderfully blurred image is projected
behind the lens...
Depends on what you're drinking, of course.
Jostein
colon, dash, end-parenthesis.
----- Original Message -----
From: "mike wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Double exposures with *istD: part 1
From: Jostein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 2005/07/05 Tue PM 01:35:51 GMT
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Double exposures with *istD: part 1
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I just went outside and tried this because I didn't think it made
> much sense. I was right. It didn't make much sense. The halo does
> get much bigger when you focus closer but it also expands when
> you
> focus further away. My new theory is that you should focus closer
> because it will go out of focus more quickly and more completely
> because the DOF narrows in that direction.
Maybe it's got something to do with rendering of the famous
bokeh...
No. You need the defocused image to be in front of the focused
image or you won't get the lovely blur.
Do I need to 8-)?
-----------------------------------------
Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
