The ten rules of photography...

[code20photog]

You just don't get it, do you? Please go back and take a remedial course in photography. You can only change the DOF by changing the aperture. Period. A change in shutter speed cannot change the DOF.

I have a Bachelor's Degree in photography.

Shutter speed and aperture are linked hand in hand. A change in shutter speed will increase or decrease the size of the aperture needed to allow the proper amount of light in to correctly expose the image.

As the shutter speed increases, the less time an image has to be properly exposed and as such the larger the aperture needs to be to allow in sufficient amount of light. A larger aperture will decrease the depth of field. This effect will become more apparent as the focal length of the lens increases.

As the shutter speed decreases, the time the shutter is open requires a smaller aperture to regulate the amount of light into the open shutter to properly expose the image. The smaller the aperture, the great the depth of field. As with the above the effects of this will be more or less apparent dependent on the focal length of the lens.

Go take a Pentax K1000, grab a roll of 100ASA film, go outside on a bright sunny day and set the camera for 1/125 @ F16. Then change the shutter speed or the aperture independent of each other, and watch the images become over and under exposed.

You can't change the shutter speed without changing the aperture, and with the change of aperture, you change the depth of field.

 

[SimonW]

A change in shutter speed will increase or decrease the size of the aperture

I think Doug thought that you meant that the shutter speed adjustment itself changed the DOF.

Changing the shutter speed in order to control the aperture you want is acceptable in stills photography (to a point), but for video it is a major no no.

 

[Douglas]

You can't change the shutter speed without changing the aperture

False.

I absolutely can change the aperture without ever changing the shutter speed to compensate. For example I can change the ISO (Gain) or even add or remove ND to the lens to change the exposure -- and leave the shutter speed completely untouched.

[FONT=&quot]In fact, in some shooting situations, I have even more tools at my disposal to compensate for a change in aperture. For example, if I’m setting up a nicely lit sit-down interview and I find that there is too much light to shoot at my desired f-stop of f/2.8, I can move the lights a little further back, I can add a dimmer, I can turn off lamps in a multi-bank fixture, I can close the drapes, I can change to lower-wattage bulbs, I can rotate the lights so they aren’t shooting straight on, I can add diffusion gels, etc. There are dozens of tricks to compensate for a change in aperture without ever changing the shutter speed. Changing the shutter speed to allow me to get my desired aperture wouldn’t even be on my list of options. Why? Because of the previously mentioned side effects with motion. Even motion that is as simple as the interviewee gesturing or talking with his/her hands. I don't want to see that strobe effect.

Read Simon's post. At least he gets what I'm saying, but you're too stubborn to listen. Let me repeat: SHUTTER SPEED DOES NOT AFFECT DEPTH-OF-FIELD. DOF is an optical phenomenon of the lens, and shutter speed has nothing to do with optics, so how could a change possibly affect the DOF?

Okay, go ahead and give me your lecture again about how a change in shutter speed will force a change in aperture and thus a change in DOF. Let’s just keep going around in the same stupid circle[/FONT]

 

[slick]

I'm not a fan of the jittery look of high-shutter-speed video unless it is for a specific effect. If you want tighter Depth of Field, why not put a 1 or 2 stop neutral density filter on your camera to cut the same light that your shutter speed change does?

 

[Baltimore Shooter]

I'm not a fan of the jittery look of high-shutter-speed video unless it is for a specific effect. If you want tighter Depth of Field, why not put a 1 or 2 stop neutral density filter on your camera to cut the same light that your shutter speed change does?

I agree, however some cameras don't have an ND and a CC filter. Some cameras only have one. That said, positioning the subject further from the camera and further from the background helps, although sometimes that can't be accomplished either when you're only allowed to shoot in a tight office and they won't allow you anywhere else. Sometimes you have to bite the bullet and do it.

Warren

 

[Stoney]

Here is what makes this forum get so ridiculous at times... I started reading other forums for information on the profession... B-roll is getting to be a personality forum. I've fallen into the argument trap over discussions of the NPPA before, when all I really should do is not get into it in the first place!

The guys that have been here for a while are shouting louder and louder and the new guys are talking out of their as*es more and more. Everyone is starting to sound ridiculous.

For crying out loud! You'd think someone mentioned a VJ or something!

 

[mayormustard]

Is laughter the most common response when ya lay that on em?
lol

Dunno...Is this in response to the "Keeping wide shots wide..." comment I made? I guess it might not make sense to everyone right off the bat, but for me it does... Can you climb up that hill for a wide shot instead of backing up ten feet? Is a wide shot a shot of the house or a shot of the neighborhood? Did you cover the close-up with the head and shoulders shot? Or can you use a shot of their eyes? All it is, is a reminder to think outside of the frame of mind one can get caught in while on a shoot.

Maybe you were "laughing out loud" because you were thinking about shooting porn? Hmm, not laughing so much myself -- as I'm grossed out now.

 

[MtnShooter]

I'll tell you what, I challenge you to a dual at 20 paces to see who can follow action better.

There's a guy on this site who on another site posted some footage he shot on an EX3 at an air show. Amazing stuff. He really knew what he was doing.

He also produces DVDs and field guides about how-to-operate some cameras. One of the creative things he encourages folks to try is the Slow Shutter function on the EX3 (but not to increase DOF).

For the life of me I can't remember that guy's name. You'd think I could... as much as I've spent on his products.

Getting old sucks. I can't remember s**t anymore.

 

[adam]

We had a shooter at my station who brought either an EX1 or and EX3 up to Rainier and used the slow shutter speed as the climbing team broke camp pre-dawn. The effect was perfect. The use of really high or really low shutter speed is an effect though and he did a nice job of editing into and out of it. It's sort of like a new take on the time lapse effect. He ran the video straight that was shot at something like 1/10th, it was neat.

Slick mentioned the jittery or strobing effect that a higher shutter speed can cause. I don't advocate really ever pushing over 1/100th for a "normal" shooting scenario. If you're headed to 1/250th and north one should recognize that you're likely going to be drawing attention to shutter and there should be a reason for it just like a slow shutter or time lapse.

Someone at KUSA (I think) did a piece on top fuel drag racing years ago and the shutter was really cranked. It was perfect for a piece about speed, your eye was dragged into every frame and, of course, the story telling was superb. If someone knows where it is online please post it.

 

[Douglas]

There's a guy on this site who on another site posted some footage he shot on an EX3 at an air show. For the life of me I can't remember that guy's name.

Charles, is the video you're speaking of? It sucks.
http://vimeo.com/5425091

I can't remember his name either, but he's obviously a hack who is too old and stupid to think outside the box. The video would have been so much better if he'd left some dirt on the lens, shot it handheld, and maybe even boosted the shutter speed to 1/500th to really get some nice DOF going. The action just doesn't "pop". Also, it points out the risk you take by having a pan-handle on the tripod -- next thing you know, you're tempted to follow the action intestead of letting eveything go in and out of the frame.

 

[MtnShooter]

Also, it points out the risk you take by having a pan-handle on the tripod .

Tripod?

OMG... that is soooooo 90s.

 

[adam]

Here's a story that features some crud on the lens and what looks like a little bit of shutter work. There are no long pans that dissolve into another pan, in fact it's just a guy breaking some rules to do his best work.
It's not the same challenge as say, HD home movies at golden hour, but local news charity cases seem to like stuff like this. Be forewarned, the pictures take a back seat to one of those damn stories and some thoughtful edits.

http://www.nppa.org/competitions/qu...2006/winners_of_year/winners/goin_places.html

To be honest I'd rather be out working in that stuff than shooting a McKinsey Consulting annual meeting.

 

[slick]

Adam, that's a perfect example of knowing the rules and BREAKING them at the right time. The snow covered lens added to the adventure and immediacy of the story. I think the point is some are bragging about cutting corners for the sake of cutting corners. There should be a base respect for the rules and an intentional reason for breaking them.

 

[Tv Shooter]

I can move the lights a little further back, I can add a dimmer, I can turn off lamps in a multi-bank fixture, I can close the drapes, I can change to lower-wattage bulbs, I can rotate the lights so they aren’t shooting straight on, I can add diffusion gels, etc. There are dozens of tricks to compensate for a change in aperture without ever changing the shutter speed. Changing the shutter speed to allow me to get my desired aperture wouldn’t even be on my list of options.

I saw a video that taught things like that, plus how to build a great light kit for $1500 bucks. It was called "How to Setup,Light,& Shoot Great Looking Interviews" and it's available here:

http://www.vortexmedia.com/DVD1.html

 

[AlexLucas]

I saw a video that taught things like that, plus how to build a great light kit for $1500 bucks. It was called "How to Setup,Light,& Shoot Great Looking Interviews" and it's available here:

http://www.vortexmedia.com/DVD1.html

(Points over at Tv Shooter and Douglas)
Hey! No fair! You're selling knowledge over here!
Photography is supposed to be whatever I think it is!
Dudes, you're bumming out my artistic ride with all of this talk about technical stuff!

I looooove it when people start talking about shutter and depth of field... it's one of the first questions I ask a noob shooter. "So, I saw your package the other day... how did you get that soft look on your background?"
"Well, here's what you do. You get that shutter up, and then you pop the gain, and then you..."

Guys, the iris controls depth of field. That's it. Nothing else controls the depth of field. Period. To set it right, you open up the iris, and then you use filters and shutters to set the look at the appropriate exposure... weighing the trade offs of color loss vs. motion effects.
'Taa-daaaaa!'

(Sweating) Man, that was hard.
That is all.

Sure, Shooter and Douglas could talk all day about look, but seriously, open the iris, and then set the filter, and then shutter down.
Yes, it was just that simple, and you do it every time the same way.

 

[Nino Giannotti]

And maybe Nino and I have gotten too old an cranky to be of any use here anymore.

I AM NOT A CRANKY OLD MAN!!!!

Well.... at least not cranky. In reality those who work with me know me as being of very good nature. But probably just like you Doug, recently I have developed a very low tolerance for the two fastest growing areas of this business:

IGNORANCE & STUPIDITY

Until a few years ago some of these brainless idiots wouldn’t even qualify as janitors, now thanks to cameras that require absolutely no intelligence to operate they call themselves photographers. Instead of asking questions to better themselves they keep flapping their gums attempting to spread their gospel of ignorance. Of course it takes at least a little bit of intelligence to know what question to ask, they just haven’t gotten that far yet. Unfortunately for some strange phenomenon they all gravitate here to B-Roll transforming this great site into a mental institution.

As a senior member of this forum I propose that Kevin should start a separate board titled IGNORANCE AND STUPIDITY. In all fairness even idiots should have a place to freely express themselves without having to worry about the interference of intelligence.

I also propose that Grinner should be appointed moderator of this new board, as nobody is better qualified on the subject.

 

[At the scene]

I AM NOT A CRANKY OLD MAN!!!!

As a senior member of this forum I propose that Kevin should start a separate board titled IGNORANCE AND STUPIDITY. In all fairness even idiots should have a place to freely express themselves without having to worry about the interference of intelligence.

I also propose that Grinner should be appointed moderator of this new board, as nobody is better qualified on the subject.

I'll second that motion. All in favor say I!




.

 

[grinner]

lol
Nino, your entire post translates to "dammit, technology has evolved quicker than I have and I'm freakin pissed about it!"
Sounded a lil cranky to me. I'll take stupidity and ignorance ober fear any day, good sir. I learn things everyday while those in fear avoid growth.
You had a good run though.

 

[Chicago Dog]

I almost covered my laptop in Wheaties just now.


At first, I didn't agree with Douglas' approach to the thread. After reading Nino's response, though, both remind me of a professor I had in college. He was infamous for making weaker students cry.

Once you could get past his abrasive approach, you understood why he was the way he was. After years of teaching journalism, he'd grown tired of dealing with the quasi-divas who wanted to anchor SportsCenter or Inside Edition immediately after college. He wanted realistic students that weren't going to waste his time.

If you showed a genuine interest in the profession and actively worked to improve your product, he'd take you much more seriously. He wouldn't let up on his style of criticism, but damn if you didn't see a drastic improvement upon your skills as a result. He cranked out some great colleagues.

Upon graduation, he does his damndest to find you a job.

Folks could probably learn a thing or two if they get some thicker skin. That's not to say that any of us should start spewing knowledge like Gordon Ramsay, but it certainly would cull the amateurs and posers from the profession.

Welcome back, Nino.

Nino, your entire post translates to "dammit, technology has evolved quicker than I have and I'm freakin pissed about it!"

That's funny, coming from a guy that unwisely invested $50,000 in an editing system two years ago.

I got mine for a grand total of $3,000 -- and I don't need to load it all into the unpadded family station wagon to move it around. That means that I don't have to spend even more money renting a room in someone else's office.

 

[PhotoJones]

Someone at KUSA (I think) did a piece on top fuel drag racing years ago and the shutter was really cranked. It was perfect for a piece about speed, your eye was dragged into every frame and, of course, the story telling was superb. If someone knows where it is online please post it.

Can't find a link to that story but I remember watching in awe when it was released on the NPPA POY tapes many years back. It was Eric Kehe at KUSA and I believe it had "Mile High" in the title as it was shot at the Mile High dragway near Denver. Yes, I'd LOVE to watch that again (over and over). Yes, excellent storytelling and example of how to EFFECTIVELY use a fast shutter speed!