Focus technique?

[Woahitsturtle]

Hi, I am new to this forum and new to photography. Over the last couple of weeks I have been playing around with my moms Canon EOS DSLR. I have to say, it was pretty fun, so I decided to go purchase my own camera and try to learn a thing or two on it. So after reading around on the internet I decided that going with an old 35mm SLR was cheaper, and better to learn the basics on. So I went out to find me an old used SLR, with my first stop being at Goodwill. I ended up finding an Nikon FM10 for $5, and quickly bought it. I was excited to say the least.

Now to my question. This may not be the right place to post this but seeing as I was looking to use this technique to take pictures of people, how do you Keep the object you want in focus (such as a face) while leaving everything else soft(I guess thats the right word?). Any help would be much appreciated.

[RichardTaylor]

It's called depth of field, DOF) (zone of sharpness) and it is controlled by focal length (more DOF with longer focal lenghts - ie "zoomed in"), subject distance, and aperture (the size of the hole in the lens that lets light in).

For an into to aperture see part 2 & 3 of this basic exposure tutorial.
Exposure (2) ISO + Intro to Aperture

[Tzetsin]

Originally Posted by Woahitsturtle

So after reading around on the internet I decided that going with an old 35mm SLR was cheaper, and better to learn the basics on.

I know this isnt in response to your original question but I wanted to point out that this statement is wrong. Very very wrong.

the camera you bought is going to hamper your education in a very very very very large way, and I'll tell you why.

1: It cost you 5 bucks for the camera, but your going to pay big bucks for film and developing.

2: you'll end up blowing a roll of film "learning" and be very disapointed after paying however much to get them developed, only to find out you screwed something up and you have a whole roll of black pictures, or out of focus, or over exposed.... theres a whole lot of ways to technically screw up a shot and you'll never know until you pay to have it developed.

3: (at the risk of flack from the old timers on this forum) Learning to use a film camera is a complete waste of time. Sure you can learn a few basics, but photography is a digital medium now and there isnt very much on a film camera that transfers well into the digtal camera. What I mean is that most of what you learn is already obsolete.

4:Shooting film restricts its use. After you get it developed... there you go. What you got is all you get. Sure you could scan it... but if your going to do that, you might as well just shoot digital in the first place

5:Because photography is a digital medium today, taking the picture is only part of the process. Its like saying you can drive just because you can turn on a car and put it in gear. Post processing is all done on a computer now, and I'll tell you from my experience that out of 100 keepers that I shoot exactly ZERO got that way without some kind of post. If you think you'll get to the point of shooting good imagery just by shooting film, your in for a very very long and expensive road.

I could list a dozen more reasons to go digital, but I'll just point out the two most important things i want you to think about from this post...

Instant feedback. Take the shot, look at it, screwed it up? no prob, adjust and shoot again.

Cheaper. Camera might cost more, but you can take as many pictures as you want and there is not residual cost. (as long as you have a rechargable battery ;D)

[ElCapitanoAwesomo]

i dont necessarily agree with Tzetsin. traditional 35mm SLRs are expensive for developement of film, but it also teaches you to be sparing with your shots. i guess it depends on your view on things, i prefer to take fewer picture that are all good than taking tons of crappy photos and relying on editing them later. with film, you learn how to be sparing with your shots.

after a quick bit of reading on the FM10, i found out the meter is very reliable, so trust the bar that you see through the view finder. to achieve bokeh, or the background blur or softness, you'll need to shoot with a larger aperture (smaller f/ number). when you set your aperture, then set a shutter speed to suit it, and watch the meter. try to get it to the center, and if you prefer to over or under expose your shots, go to the left or right on the bar respectively.

also, zooming helps in the production of bokeh in a photograph, well, more of distance of the subject from the blurred background. for the best results, set the subject as far away from the background as possible, and then place yourself at a suitable range from your subject. this will increase the chances of a more blurred background.

also, make sure you put the focus on the person! some things to make sure you get good portraits using a wide aperture is a fast shutter speed. more light goes through the lens with a wide aperture, so you'll need to compensate with a faster shutter speed. since the FM10 goes up till 2000, you'll have some trouble in broad daylight if you have a lens that reaches f/1.8, though if you have a lens thats f/3.5-5.6, you'll be fine.

in summary, smaller f/ number, the shallower DOF you'll have, background distance from the subject will also make a huge difference. remember to trust the meter to some extent to get properly exposed shots! dont feel bad about your purchase. you got n amazing film SLR for an amazing price, though in the longrun, developing film will begin to add up FAST, so look to invest in a DSLR once you understand the function of Aperture, Shutter Speed, ISO (ASA of film, 100, 200, 400, etc) and importantly, composition!

[Tzetsin]

Originally Posted by ElCapitanoAwesomo

i dont necessarily agree with Tzetsin. traditional 35mm SLRs are expensive for developement of film, but it also teaches you to be sparing with your shots. i guess it depends on your view on things, i prefer to take fewer picture that are all good than taking tons of crappy photos and relying on editing them later. with film, you learn how to be sparing with your shots.

your not exactly wrong, but put things in perspective. If you go to school then you have someone teaching you how to use your camera. With no one there to teach, the only way to learn is to shoot, so maximizing the amount of shooting is the only way your going to learn anything. if you have to wait until the film is processed then you've likely already forgotten what you did at the time of shooting so your going to learn very slowly.

Also, if your a good photographer you will make good images. It doesnt really matter "how" you ended up with the image. So go ahead and shoot 1009435897234089572308957213 x 2 pictures if you want, it wont cost you any more than shooting 1 and you'll have increased your chances of getting one thats really great. Who wants to be sparing in this day and age anyway?

When you already know what your doing, you can worry about making each shot count. When your learning, shoot everything you see in every kind of light at every angle. twice.

[ElCapitanoAwesomo]

Originally Posted by Tzetsin

your not exactly wrong, but put things in perspective. If you go to school then you have someone teaching you how to use your camera. With no one there to teach, the only way to learn is to shoot, so maximizing the amount of shooting is the only way your going to learn anything. if you have to wait until the film is processed then you've likely already forgotten what you did at the time of shooting so your going to learn very slowly.

Also, if your a good photographer you will make good images. It doesnt really matter "how" you ended up with the image. So go ahead and shoot 1009435897234089572308957213 x 2 pictures if you want, it wont cost you any more than shooting 1 and you'll have increased your chances of getting one thats really great. Who wants to be sparing in this day and age anyway?

When you already know what your doing, you can worry about making each shot count. When your learning, shoot everything you see in every kind of light at every angle. twice.

i'm coming from a similar perspective as the OP. when i first started 3 years ago, i didnt have access to a DSLR, only a SLR, the SLR's manual, and the internet. i learned through experimentation, and tons of reading, which by the OP's initiative of asking the question, i'm assuming they're doing as well. i dont doubt that taking many pictures helps, and shooting digital is a fantastic revolution with instant results, as well as having the information recorded so you know whats wrong.
i believe that learning on film is just as handy, plus the OP may decide to shoot film in addition to digital in the future. i apreciate your opinion, but i have more of a "get it right in camera" attitude to photography that i learned through making every shot count whilst shooting film.

[ddr]

... there really isn't a right answer imo

i learned all about my 350D reading stuff online. Learned all about the flash reading online and in certain books. and then I bought an AE-1 out of curiosity for the mechanics and genuine film effects. I would have been quite turned off spending $ on rolls to learn, when I could have shot at different apertures and shutter speeds and look at the effects on the LCD on the camera and at home. There's also the cost of a good scanner if you want to save money by just developing the roll and not prints, and scanning them to share online or to archive.

film or digital, we must accept that the latter is what photography has evolved into. many professionals that started with film never understand why people choose to shoot film or start with film. they need very consistent results and results that can be shown to clients right away.

[friendship7]

IMO I would strongly advise on the digital route NOT the film route.
DON'T LEARN ON A FILM CAMERA!!!!
The ability to experiment with settings, light and subjects, REAL-TIME is so advantageous.
So is the ability to try a 100 different routes to any one shot REAL-TIME
Park the film camera for now and beg, steal or borrow a digital and enjoy the ride!

[GreggObst]

I know there is this gut wrenching nostalgia over film and that seems to be the in thing these days but come on already... You wouldn't want to learn how to drive your car by buying a horse and buggy,

If you have access to barrowing a family member's DSLR, I would continue to learn on that and eventually get one of your own (although a Nikon, of course )

[Woahitsturtle]

Thanks Everyone for the helpful posts, especially involving my original question. For Now though, I am just going to stick with the FM10, but I am going to keep my eye out for a good deal on an DSLR, since I am sure having both would probably be the most beneficial.

What, in yalls opinions, would be a good entry level DSLR, that would last me for a year or two?