Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] DOF re-visited

Subject: [OM] DOF re-visited
From: "Brian Swale" <bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 21:19:18 +1200
Hello fellow Zuiks,

I had a very pleasant surprise in receiving an e-mail from a lurking OM-guru a 
day ago, accompanied with permission to share it with any Zuikoholics who 
frequented the 'net in this forum. So that's not hard work, is it?

Gary Reese wrote:-

The Leica Way was one of the early books I read as a photographer.  The
photo examples reflect the photographic movement that predominated the
post WW-II world: a unity of mankind as a species which carries the same
common traditions and traits.

As one can see from my conservation photography course syllabus at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~pcacala/Heritage.htm
I teach variations on hyperfocal distance focusing. Basically just
determine the distance which holds the largest percentage of subject
detail. Get that distance as close to the point of critical focus (i.e.,
the focus mark) as possible, with your near and far limits to the
composition within the depth of field indicators.  You choose your
aperture based on the depth of your subject. When you expect to do big
enlargements, use the depth of field indicators for an aperture 1 stop
smaller than you would otherwise.

Matheson (the author) was a European. Great depth of field in landscape
photography was a dominant trait of western USA large format landscape
photographers.  I think there were many miles of philosophy between them
in the early 1950s, which isn't surprising when one considers the
evolution of film at that time: it wasn't the best choice for landscape
work.

CLOSE QUOTE

You might recall that I mentioned reading the book "The Leica Way" by 
Matheson, a couple of nights ago, and this followed right on the heels of, and 
was also in relation to, a discussion on the need to focus precisely where 
you wanted, with the Zuiko 300 and some other lenses, and not rely on the 
focus markings on the lens barrel. 

The other thing that inhibited landscape photography in the 1940s and 1950s 
in Europe was, I'd put money on it, severe atmospheric pollution. Even if you 
found a vantage point for a nice view, for example of one kind of landscape 
shot, the chance of actually seeing very far would be nil except in perhaps 
Wales, W. Ireland, W. Scotland, Cornwall, Norway & Sweden, and maybe 
parts of Portugal and Spain. But not in Germany, England/lowland Scotland, 
France, Belgium, Netherlands, Russia, Italy, Greece etc.

And in the USA in 1990, I flew from Newark (NJ) airport to Vermont, and at 
6pm and 10,000 ft the setting sun was brick-red from air pollution. No, I 
hadn't tasted the complementary glass of wine at that point of the trip <g>.

What a contrast to the intense silvery light when I got back home.

Brian

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz