DOF: Miniature Rose: where to focus?

[Phyrie]

Hello all,
I posted this (my first post!) in the SYS section, but I realize that without criticism, we can't learn, so I am posting the same pic here.

I will copy/paste some of what I said in the other thread, as it's apropos here as well.

There are several other shots of the same rose, but with the focus on different spots on my Photobucket page. I will post links to them following.

"I pretty much blew the year's budget on my Canon EOS T3i and lens kit (18mm-55mm & 55mm-250mm), but I really like the idea of macro shots, so I "invested" in some really affordable (read:cheap!) macro tubes. While I can only seem to use the middle one (can't find a focus with the other ones) I have been able to get couple of pretty shots (IMVHO)."



Other shots of the same little rose:
http://i694.photobucket.com/albums/v..._1148Small.jpg
http://i694.photobucket.com/albums/v..._1147Small.jpg
http://i694.photobucket.com/albums/v..._1145Small.jpg

Camera: Canon EOS REBEL T3i
Resolution: 720 x 480
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 50.0mm (35mm equivalent: 78mm...
CCD Width: 22.99mm
Exposure Time: 0.167 s (1/6)
Aperture: f/1.0
ISO Equiv.: 100
Whitebalance: Manual
Metering Mode: matrix
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)

I chose this one as the better of the others because of where the extremely shallow depth of field focused. I like the one big water drop sitting right in the middle, and I like the way the rose is blurred on it's most outer petals, whether in front or behind. (I hope I am using the words "depth of field" correctly!). It's almost as though the camera chose random petals to focus on, no matter how close or far they were to the lens.

To me, this is "art" but is it "photography"? Or is it even "art"?

Thank you in advance for your help.

Phyrie

[Marjory]

I also joined last month and have the same camera as you. I got it in December. Like you I do not know what is called a good photo because I am still learning the right ISO's and apertures etc etc lol. I will follow this post and see what they say. Enjoy your camera.

[zona5101]

I think focus point is subjective on something like this. Alternatively you can stack the focus of several shots into one.
Here is a description of the process:
Focus Stacking in Photoshop CS5

[loons49]

Extension tubes generally work better with prime lenses as opposed to zooms and will always require very sharp focussing because of the shallow DOF which results. The other issue is working distance (how close the front lens element is to the subject) which is extremely short making their use with some subjects awkward to impossible. To achieve good image quality with extension tubes you should use a tripod with a rack and pinion head and a remote shutter release. The tripod will allow you to utilize smaller apertures (longer exposures) and the rack and pinion head will enable you to achieve a sharp focus without touching the lens and also precise adjustment of the focus point if you are going to focus stacking. To achieve a longer working distance, you pretty much need to invest in an actual macro lens although you can save in this area by going for an older (non-auto focus / image stabilized) lens since those features really do not help much with macro work. BTW, the same logic also applies to getting a 50mm prime to use with your tubes .... you can use a good older style lens (assuming compatability with your camera body). Remember, macro photography as with all genres of photography is a journey of mastering techniques and equipment .... Enjoy it !

[Doug Sundseth]

Your primary point of focus should be the point you want the viewer's eye drawn to. And that's an artistic decision. In this case, the water droplet seems reasonable to me.

I'm pretty sure you aren't managing f/1.0 with a kit lens, but whatever your aperture, if you reduce it you'll get more DoF. Again, that's an artistic decision and it sounds like you're happy with what you have. FWIW, I rather prefer more depth to my flower photos, but you're certainly not doing it wrong.