Well, Larry, you have certainly covered the field -- or at least the depth thereof! <G>
I think most of them are effective, depending on what your intent is and what you are trying to illustrate. The exception is 20210807-LRC15365; I find the slightly OoF bug quite distracting in that image. Dan Matyola *https://tinyurl.com/DJM-Pentax-Gallery <https://tinyurl.com/DJM-Pentax-Gallery>* On Sat, Aug 7, 2021 at 6:16 PM Larry Colen <[email protected]> wrote: > I took another crack at the passiflora today, and there was a cute little > orange bug hanging out on it. > > I took things a bit more seriously, actually using a tripod and such. > Even so it didn’t take much of a breeze to get the flowers moving around a > bit, and it was a bit of a challenge juggling motion blur, noise and depth > of field. > > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/51363571251/in/album-72157719660768917/ > > Since there was a discussion yesterday about depth of field, I tried a bit > of an experiment, for them that are interested. I bracketed the aperture > on several different compositions and posted photos starting at f/2.8 going > on up to f/32. Some of the photos might even have some artistic merit. > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72157719660768917 > > Alternatively, using the fluidr front end > https://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157719660768917 > > > -- > Larry Colen > [email protected] > > > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
