How oh how do they do this?

[abarickman]

I am a huge fan of the wedding photographer Jasmine Star (http://www.jasminestarblog.com/). She is great on a lot of levels but one of the things I love about her photos is the incredible sharpness and softness of the bokeh. It has a creaminess to it that I cannot figure out.

Here is an example --> http://www.jasminestarblog.com/image...Cooper0020.jpg

I have been shooting for a pretty long time and I have never see my pictures have the same sharp-creaminess even on accident. I read where she wrote that she does very little post processing on her images, for a while I thought she was using Alien skin to simulate bokeh on her pics.

Other photographers that I like seem to have this same quality to their images also ie - Justin and Mary --> http://www.justinmarantz.com/

Example --> http://www.justinmarantz.com/images/...ndon_day04.jpg

My latest theory is that they are shooting wide open with F 1.4 or faster glass and using full frame cameras. Would this account for at least part of what I am seeing? Anybody got ideas on this?

[oldwolf]

I'm guessing the f/stop is 2.8 or 3ish on the second one. The first picture it could even be 4ish since the people in the background are pretty far away and the dad is slightly out of focus. On both pictures they are probably also zooming into the shot as well.

[dakwegmo]

First shot:
Canon 5DmkII
1/800"
f/2.8
ISO 200
135mm

Second shot:
Nikon D2Xs (cropped sensor)
1/640"
f/2.8
ISO 100
130mm

The EXIF data doesn't say which lens either was using, but I suspect professional glass.

I'd say the effect is probably a combination of large apertures, distance from the subject, and spot on focus.

[oldwolf]

damn. missed the f/stop on the first one hehe.

[abarickman]

Thanks for the info. So does anyone else see what I see? It can't be just good focus.

[oldwolf]

Originally Posted by abarickman

Thanks for the info. So does anyone else see what I see? It can't be just good focus.

Hate to say it but it looks like good glass, good focus and nice pp.

[inkista]

I think it's the combination of:

• A full-frame body
• A great fast telephoto lens (probably 70-200 f/2.8)
• Wide aperture

All three of these things will increase the amount of out-of-focus blur you get. Plus, a telephoto will almost always have better sharpness across the frame and less distortion than a wide-angle lens (not to mention better CA control). The focal length (and the L glass) make a difference. Here's an example from my 135L:


XT. EF 135mm f/2L USM. iso 800, f/2, 1/1600s.

You can get something similar at shorter focal lengths with an extremely wide aperture, but the character of the lens plays into the quality of the bokeh and the sharpness at the focus point. My adapted Zuiko just feels different from the 135L, even though it gives oof blur by the bucketful at f/1.2.


XT. Olympus OM-mount Zuiko Auto-S 50mm f/1.2, OM->EOS adapter ring+ND4 filter, iso 100, f/1.2, 1/1000s.

[abarickman]

Thanks Inksta and other who responded.

This is my only shot of late that I think approximates the look. It was taken with my 70-200mm F4L IS at 97mm and F4.


(You can tell more on the larger version http://www.flickr.com/photos/ajbaric...26152/sizes/o/)

When I took it I immediately noticed the look but am not sure why this one has "it" and the shot before did not.

[dakwegmo]

I really don't think there's much more going on with these shots other than the good glass at wide apertures. The only other thing I see is that these were shot outdoors, and probably in the shade.

inkista, how close were you to the bird when you got that shot?

[inkista]

Not sure. Maybe 2-3 feet? He got pretty close to me. Sadly, the EXIF doesn't have focus distance.