Welcome to the Photography Forum

Forum Moderators: wheatpenny Forum Coordinators: Anim8dtoon

Photography F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2025 Feb 03 6:38 am)

Photography Gallery - Tutorials

Renderosity Marketplace

Subject: zoom photo

jocko500 opened this issue on Oct 21, 2005 · 11 posts

Back to Forum Print

jocko500 ( ) posted Fri, 21 October 2005 at 9:25 PM · edited Thu, 06 February 2025 at 2:29 PM

here is the first photo I took . It is on reg. setting

what you see is not what you know; it in your face

jocko500 ( ) posted Fri, 21 October 2005 at 9:27 PM

I then walk off and took this shot in the distance

what you see is not what you know; it in your face

jocko500 ( ) posted Fri, 21 October 2005 at 9:30 PM

then I zoom in and took this photo. Now my question is do this one looks better than the frist? I think it flatten out the image and have no depth to it. It may be good in some images but I do not think it works here or am I wrong?

what you see is not what you know; it in your face

DJB ( ) posted Sat, 22 October 2005 at 12:12 AM

I personally like number 1 and 2. Number 3 seems to have lost meaning and has the top cropped off.

"The happiness of a man in this life does not consist in the absence but in the mastery of his passions."

FuzzyShadows ( ) posted Sat, 22 October 2005 at 12:28 AM

I think jocko was talking more about the "physical" quality of the first and last picture, as opposed to the composition and such. I think it would be better to compare if you had taken identical shots (as much as you could have)... one with you close and the other far away but zoomed, to better compare the two.

jocko500 ( ) posted Sat, 22 October 2005 at 12:32 AM

yes I was talking of the physical quality of the picture and what zoom do to a image. It flating it out and depth is lost

what you see is not what you know; it in your face

TobinLam ( ) posted Sat, 22 October 2005 at 1:41 AM

I would choose #1 over 3 for the added depth.

Onslow ( ) posted Sat, 22 October 2005 at 2:07 AM

The focal length alters the perspective, so with your zoom as you have say everything appears squashed up together at the longer focal length. This does have advantages for some compositions, but in this one I think not. It looks to me that you are trying to show us the whole of the shed, how long it is and how decrepit it is. From that point #1 works best. # 2 works to show us the surroundings but doesn't really show us much of the detail of the shed, # 3 works least because of the perspective, also the focus is a lot softer due either to the lens resolution or camera movement. This is a good illustration of focal length v perspective and how it can be used in composition. The perspective and width of normal eyesight for people is a focal length of 46mm on a 35mm camera. You will need to translate this in to a focal length for your camera because it will vary with sensor size if using digital. On that point it is also worth noting that if you take your pics using focal lengths at around 46-50mm then they have a very comfortable feel to them, if you go shorter than that they start increasingly to have a dreamy surreal feel to the image which is what you see in some modern landscapes. Nice posting and thread jocko :)

And every one said, 'If we only live,
We too will go to sea in a Sieve,---
To the hills of the Chankly Bore!'
Far and few, far and few, Are the lands where the Jumblies live;
Their heads are green, and their hands are blue, And they went to sea in a Sieve.

Edward Lear
http://www.nonsenselit.org/Lear/ns/jumblies.html