Announcement

Collapse

Please submit your assignment suggestions!

Hi! Please visit THIS THREAD and submit your dPS Assignment suggestions! We'll be starting assignments again in two weeks time - hope to see you all participating.

Thanks!
See more
See less

Brenizer Method

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Brenizer Method

    Hey there (:

    Not sure if anybody else has had a try at this, but it is rather fun and makes for an amazing shot with a lot of depth.

    You pretty much take a panorama portrait to create more dramatic depth.

    To start off you just snap a shot of your subject and then continue to shoot the surrounding environment; each of the shots below consist of 10 or more images stitched together.

    They were all shot with a 50mm; I haven't tried yet (due to lack of lens), however you can get even more depth with a larger focal length such as 85mm.

    You can learn more about the Brenizer Method by clicking here





    Visit my Website (:

    Also you should go ahead and visit my Facebook page Tyler Randall - PhotoShoots
    Oh and don't forget to like it (:

  • #2
    The Brenizer method works best with longer focal lengths and, i'd wager, a larger aperture. As it stands it looks like you shot with a 35mm f/1.4, if that.

    I tried this a while back at 300mm/5.6. Worked well, though the stitching was a pain.
    I am responsible for what I say; not what you understand.
    adammontpetit.com
    Gear List
    500PX | Graphic Design

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by OsmosisStudios View Post
      The Brenizer method works best with longer focal lengths and, i'd wager, a larger aperture.
      Yeah, the purpose it get a large FOV while also getting the shallow DOF and perspective of a longer lens used "too close."
      Steve
      the Photographic Academy.com
      SharpShooter Industries
      My 500px, My Flickr, My Blog

      Comment


      • #4
        Interesting, I don't know much about this approach... To avoid camera shake... you need a remote to change aperture for each shot ?

        Comment


        • #5
          for those of you who have never seen the Brenizer Method,

          The Brenizer Method. Part 1, taking the photo(s) - YouTube

          The Brenizer Method: Bokeh Panorama - YouTube
          Rich Spears www.rspearsphotography.com
          Blog | Flickr | Zenfolio
          Nikon D3s, D700, Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8, 85mm 1.8

          Comment


          • #6
            Cool...

            Thanks for sharing, your shots look great. Sounds like a lot of hard work though... might try it sometime.

            Comment


            • #7
              Tyler, I think you did a great job with these, and the DOF you've created is very nice. The shots look awesome--great lighting. #1 and #3 really stand out.


              Originally posted by OsmosisStudios View Post
              The Brenizer method works best with longer focal lengths and, i'd wager, a larger aperture. As it stands it looks like you shot with a 35mm f/1.4, if that.

              I tried this a while back at 300mm/5.6. Worked well, though the stitching was a pain.
              Are you referring to the shots that you took of your old cameras? Because if you are, those shots completely lacked any of the depth of field/field of view impact that the Brenizer method is supposed to allow you to obtain. Those shots, basically, looked like normal single images and were boring, in my opinion. And why would you want to shoot with a larger aperture? The idea is to get as much bokeh as you can to show a shallow depth of field, while also using a very large field of view. A smaller aperture is doing to negate the effect.
              Last edited by MattJohnRobinson; 01-18-2013, 02:01 PM. Reason: smaller, not larger aperture
              blog flickr

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by MattJohnRobinson View Post
                Are you referring to the shots that you took of your old cameras? Because if you are, those shots completely lacked any of the depth of field/field of view impact that the Brenizer method is supposed to allow you to obtain. Those shots, basically, looked like normal single images and were boring, in my opinion. And why would you want to shoot with a larger aperture? The idea is to get as much bokeh as you can to show a shallow depth of field, while also using a very large field of view. A smaller aperture is doing to negate the effect.
                And a hello to you too?

                The images of the camera (this and this?) were not supposed to be a Brenizer method example: I wanted huge resolution. They were shot with a 40mm f/2.8 lens. DoF is shallow because of the proximity. Im sorry you found them boring, but I dont see them as reason enough for the attitude I got from you.

                Secondly: I used a 300mm at f/5.6 because, on Nikon's 70-300 VR, the maximum aperture is f/5.6 at 300mm. For the record: 300mm at f/5.6, on DX, gives 1" of DoF at 10ft and 3" at 20 feet. An 85mm f/1.8, for instance, gives 4" at 10 ft and 14" at 20 ft. So your comment about getting MORE DoF from a 300mm at f/5.6 is completely wrong.
                I am responsible for what I say; not what you understand.
                adammontpetit.com
                Gear List
                500PX | Graphic Design

                Comment


                • #9
                  Love #3. I had never heard of this method, but it makes sense. I may have to give it a go at some point. It looks like fun, but my "models" right now would never stay still enough for me to take the shots needed.
                  -~= Philip =~-
                  Go Shoot Something Already! - Flickr Photostream -> How I bought my gear!

                  Have you performed a few
                  Random Acts of Parenting today?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by OsmosisStudios View Post
                    And a hello to you too?

                    The images of the camera (this and this?) were not supposed to be a Brenizer method example: I wanted huge resolution. They were shot with a 40mm f/2.8 lens. DoF is shallow because of the proximity. Im sorry you found them boring, but I dont see them as reason enough for the attitude I got from you.

                    Secondly: I used a 300mm at f/5.6 because, on Nikon's 70-300 VR, the maximum aperture is f/5.6 at 300mm. For the record: 300mm at f/5.6, on DX, gives 1" of DoF at 10ft and 3" at 20 feet. An 85mm f/1.8, for instance, gives 4" at 10 ft and 14" at 20 ft. So your comment about getting MORE DoF from a 300mm at f/5.6 is completely wrong.
                    Oh, that's funny, because right here I asked what the point of the macro stitching was, and you replied "the Ryan Breziner Effect". Read your own words.

                    And even if those weren't the photos that you were talking about, where are the photos that you also tried to emmulate the Breziner Effect? I'd love to see them. Please share?

                    If you don't like my "attitude," you could refrain from coming onto somebody's thread and basically telling them "you didn't do it right, but I did this before and my shots look awesome". And what's worse, the information you're trying to advise him with is absolutely NOT the best way to go about it. You think Ryan Breziner shoots with a 300mm f/5.6? Ha. Yeah, ok. Why don't you actually listen to what he recommends. Something like an 85 at 1.2...hm, what a surprise.
                    blog flickr

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Funny that I just found this thread. I just did the shoot two days ago for the Kauai Traveler magazine cover, and I used this style for it. Hoping to have the time to process it out later today. If it turns out, I'll post it here after the magazine comes out. (The publisher would shoot me if I were to post out the magazine cover before he puts out the mag!) I think this one is going to turn out awesome, but it's going to be a tough stitch. If you have done much photo stitching, you know that moving objects make it rather difficult to get a clean stitch. Now imagine stitching images together that have rolling waves on the ocean. Yikes is it a pain in the butt! But hopefully I can make this one work!
                      Nikon D800 (x2), Nikon D7000, Nikon D300s, Nikon D90
                      ----------
                      "The Key to immortality is to first live a life worth remembering."
                      Bruce Lee

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I totally get the Brenizer method, and I'm certainly not criticising, as I love the images you've made here - they're stunning - I'm just thinking the feel of each of them doesn't feel too different from shooting at say 35mm 1.2 (as mentioned previously).... Again, adore the images, they're fantastic, but wondering if the same image would have come out of less editing with a different lens...?
                        Twitter | Facebook
                        Matt Ethan Photography

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Nevermind, I figured it out
                          Twitter | Facebook
                          Matt Ethan Photography

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by MattEthan View Post
                            I totally get the Brenizer method, and I'm certainly not criticising, as I love the images you've made here - they're stunning - I'm just thinking the feel of each of them doesn't feel too different from shooting at say 35mm 1.2 (as mentioned previously).... Again, adore the images, they're fantastic, but wondering if the same image would have come out of less editing with a different lens...?
                            Same here Matt... Never heard of this method before but doesn't seem to give anything I can see that a 1.2 wouldn't? Maybe I'm wrong though?
                            Newcastle Photography
                            Newcastle Wedding Photography

                            Follow me on twitter

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              It gives you DoF that you could otherwise only achieve with a medium-format or large-format camera, if you use enough images.

                              An 8x8 grid of images taken with a 200mm f/2.8 would be equivalent to a 25mm f/0.35, which you'd be hard-pressed to find. (Or, similarly, it would be equivalent to an 8x12 sensor with a 200mm f/2.8 lens. If you figure 8x10 is close enough, you could get your hands on that.)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X