User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  3
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: How different Focal length changes the face

  1. #1
    Member Tommo1965's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Oct 2010
    Location
    Perth Hills Mundaring
    Posts
    1,028
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    How different Focal length changes the face

    Not sure if this video has been posted before..if it has its worth a repost as I found it very informative and others might have some use for it too.

    Cheers and my name is Steve


    OMD Em1...Now with two lenses !

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/steve_tompsett/
    http://tommo.smugmug.com/

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    22 Jan 2011
    Location
    Goolwa
    Posts
    3,777
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Very interesting!! Amazing how the face distorts and it is great to see the 100mm up against the 24mm and the difference between the two. Yep, I learnt something!
    Monika
    Equipment: Canon 60D, Nikon FE, Nikkor 50mm 1.8 lens, Fancier FT-662A tripod, 18-55mm kit lens, 55-250mm kit lens, 30mm 1.4 Sigma lens, LR4, PS Elements
    Check out my Flickr photos ... http://www.flickr.com/photos/missmonny/
    ... and then you can like me on www.facebook.com/PhotoByMB or see my shop on http://www.redbubble.com/people/msmonny



  3. #3
    Member
    Threadstarter
    Tommo1965's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Oct 2010
    Location
    Perth Hills Mundaring
    Posts
    1,028
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yes I always knew that portrait togs preferred a FL around the 100mm mark..but quite honestly never knew why..now I do ...quite interesting to see even how much a 50mm distorts too

  4. #4
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    16,829
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tommo1965 View Post
    ...I found it very informative and others might have some use for it too...
    Quote Originally Posted by Ms Monny View Post
    Very interesting!! Amazing how the face distorts and it is great to see the 100mm up against the 24mm and the difference between the two. Yep, I learnt something!
    HH!

    Sure! And with such a "hip" pr"ee"sentation, they NEGLECTED to point out that it is actually the subject distance that is the determining factor in (such as facial) distortion.

    NOWHERE, did I see (about 2/3 of the way through I got sick of the hype and pushed the video along) any mention of subject distance.

    Very informative indeed! It showed you their lenses and set-up. Oh, photography? Well, I must concede they did use some cameras.

    Point of the show? OK, I give up!

    H(Am)bug.

    Edit:

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommo1965 View Post
    yes I always knew that portrait togs preferred a FL around the 100mm mark..but quite honestly never knew why..now I do ...quite interesting to see even how much a 50mm distorts too
    Oh, Ste-e-eve!
    Last edited by ameerat42; 07-08-2012 at 9:58am.
    CC, Image editing OK.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    16 Sep 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    1,218
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What was with the last part after the ads where they attack a printer with axes while dressed as pirates?
    The first part was really helpful though.
    Just a question for those who know more about this. Would dialling up some lens correction in PP fix some of that distortion effect he demonstrates here?
    Canon EOS 60D ..... EFS 18-200mm f/3.5 - 5.6 IS - 430 EXII Speedlite - "eBay special" Remote Control Unit - Manfrotto 190XPROB w 804RC2 head.

  6. #6
    Member
    Threadstarter
    Tommo1965's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Oct 2010
    Location
    Perth Hills Mundaring
    Posts
    1,028
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ameerat42 View Post
    HH!

    Sure! And with such a "hip" pr"ee"sentation, they NEGLECTED to point out that it is actually the subject distance that is the determining factor in (such as facial) distortion.

    NOWHERE, did I see (about 2/3 of the way through I got sick of the hype and pushed the video along) any mention of subject distance.

    Very informative indeed! It showed you their lenses and set-up. Oh, photography? Well, I must concede they did use some cameras.

    Point of the show? OK, I give up!

    H(Am)bug.

    Edit:



    Oh, Ste-e-eve!


    LMAO

    I think that the point was made to keep the subject the same size in the frame and was a given that you'd need to be closer to the subject as the lens got wider..eg subject distance

    look at the beginning and around 2.30
    Last edited by Tommo1965; 07-08-2012 at 10:13am.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    22 Jan 2011
    Location
    Goolwa
    Posts
    3,777
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yep!! He mentioned that the face filled the frame and it did all the way through the images. So it was a HEAD SHOT not a full body etc shot. This determined the distance.

  8. #8
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    16,829
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Steve and Monika. I agree he did, but then just kept going on with the simplified theme that FL causes distortion.
    As a demonstration it's OK, but the explanation...

    Anyway, as long as you have a pinch pf photographic salts to take.
    Am.

  9. #9
    Ausphotography Site Sponsor/Advertiser OzzieTraveller's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Oct 2009
    Location
    Forster- Tuncurry, eastern Australia
    Posts
    1,600
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    G'day all

    In the portraiture module of my workshops I get students to take pix at 55mm and also 135mm ~ shooting head shots & head & chest shots here ~ and they are all amazed at the differences to the facial features ... as well as the depth of field / background blur

    For my money - I'd prefer to do serious portraiture in the 85 - 135 zone - never with less than 55 anyway
    Regards, Phil
    Of all the stuff in a busy photographers kitbag, the ability to see photographically is the most important
    google me at Travelling School of Photography
    images.: flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Jan 2012
    Location
    Rham
    Posts
    130
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've been plating with different focal lengths, it is amazing the difference it makes
    gb From GB
    C&C is more than welcome, it's encouraged.

  11. #11
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    An awful lot depends on how the subject wants to see themselves versus how you want to portray them.
    Andrew
    Nikon, Fuji, Nikkor, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and too many other bits and pieces to list.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •