At 8:48 AM -0500 11/1/02, Gregory Fraser wrote: > > In this case a lot less depth of field would have really >> brought the kids to the fore, they wouldn't have had to compete with >> the people behind and that highrise and those three globes for the >> viewer's attention. > >Christiane, I think its time you concentrated on shooting the G2 and >put away the digital so that I don't have to read the unending >comments about the abundance of DOF in your images. If you don't >already have one, get yourself a 90mm Sonnar, open her up to f2.8, >and fire away. Besides, digital cameras, like computers are just a >passing fad (as my father said back in 1973 when he found out my >brother had been taking computer courses at University). > >Greg Fraser Depth of field is something you choose, as surely many of us are aware. Although I'm not certain what the G2 is, and which digital she's using, I'm wondering now whether the digital is one of those point and shoots that give her no control. It that's the case, I would agree with any recommendation that would give her the chance to think about her depth of field as part of taking her shot. Of course the exciting thing about street shooting, or any action shooting, is having ones wits well enough organized to think about DOF while trying to get the body language before the subject realizes and starts to act up for the camera. -- Emily L. Ferguson elf@cape.com 508-563-6822 New England landscapes, wooden boats and races, press photography Beetle cats on the web at: http://www.vsu.cape.com/~elf http://www.beetlecat.org/store.html#yrbook
