DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Tips, Tricks, and Q&A >> Distance not just xxxmm please
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 26, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/30/2005 03:59:24 PM · #1
It would be really helpful if when photographs are submitted that aswell as the mm the distance that the photograph was taken from was also listed, it is very relevant in trying assess the diificulty of the shot and the performance of the lens used.
i.e shot taken from 12'(3m)
lens : canon 70-200mm f4 L USM
apeture :f4
speed : 1000
ISO : 800
11/30/2005 04:09:45 PM · #2
Hhhmm......I may be wrong here but not all cameras record the focus distance which I believe would be the only way to know what you are refering to. I could be wrong.

June
11/30/2005 04:11:48 PM · #3
Why on earth for? I am a horrible judge of distance, and I really doubt people want to read "taken from a place about as far away as from here to that building" on my shots. ;)
11/30/2005 04:14:39 PM · #4
The distance is even down at the lens level for the SLR types -> I saw a Canon list a while back and far from all the lenses have the distance recorded.

As for the rest of the lenses or cameras then I am with Laurie - I could probably do close, medium and long way away but nothing more useful.
11/30/2005 04:17:09 PM · #5
I'll get right on that.. I *love* carrying a measuring tape with me everywhere I go, and an assistant to use it while I get ready for the shot.. and I'll tell all my subjects to FREEZE RIGHT THERE!! while I measure :)
11/30/2005 04:17:11 PM · #6
And what if there isn't a particular distance the shot is taken from? like in this photo
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/38725/thumb/258785.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/38725/thumb/258785.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
I'd have to list it as "5ft to 22miles(ish)" which wouldn't be much help really ;)

edit: I was about 500ft above sea level so apparently the horizon I could see was about 38.98 miles not 22 miles ;)

Message edited by author 2005-11-30 16:24:15.
11/30/2005 04:20:31 PM · #7
Sorry, Dude, I'm not carrying a measuring tape with me to measure how far i am away from someone or something and I sure as heck dont have a way to measure how far I am away from a tiger... the zookeepers frown on that ... and the Tigers bite. As for the moon... well next time they go there... have em hold the end of the measuring tape...and you pay for the additions as the lunar landing gets closer...

Message edited by author 2005-11-30 16:21:55.
11/30/2005 04:25:53 PM · #8
Originally posted by di53:

As for the moon... well next time they go there... have em hold the end of the measuring tape...and you pay for the additions as the lunar landing gets closer...

Not a problem;

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42198/thumb/252288.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42198/thumb/252288.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
Shot taken from: 1,263,123,360' (385,000,000m)
11/30/2005 04:27:15 PM · #9
Originally posted by jhonan:

Originally posted by di53:

As for the moon... well next time they go there... have em hold the end of the measuring tape...and you pay for the additions as the lunar landing gets closer...

Not a problem;

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42198/thumb/252288.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42198/thumb/252288.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
Shot taken from: 1,263,123,360' (385,000,000m)


hmm... might cause problems for anyone posting shots of the Andromeda galaxy. Are light years acceptable as a unit of measure?
11/30/2005 04:29:03 PM · #10
I DEMAND a remeasure!!!! get those yardsticks out!!

Originally posted by jhonan:

Originally posted by jhonan:

Originally posted by di53:

As for the moon... well next time they go there... have em hold the end of the measuring tape...and you pay for the additions as the lunar landing gets closer...

Not a problem;

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42198/thumb/252288.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42198/thumb/252288.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
Shot taken from: 1,263,123,360' (385,000,000m)


hmm... might cause problems for anyone posting shots of the Andromeda galaxy. Are light years acceptable as a unit of measure?
11/30/2005 04:39:09 PM · #11
On the reverse, what if the distance is zero?

Take, for instance, this shot:
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/393/thumb/246431.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/393/thumb/246431.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
11/30/2005 04:48:41 PM · #12
It is sad that people can not see the relevence of distance without coming up with silly remarks refering to the moon, landscapes etc.
surely it is obvious that distance that a shot was taken from as in my example approx. 3 metres would be a good way to assess the performance of say a 300mm lens over that of a 200mm lens or even that of a macro lens.
I feel sorry for all those that can not guess aprox. distance, how would you work out your flash exposure with a manual flash for instance.
11/30/2005 04:58:01 PM · #13
Even if one is a decent judge of distance, it is asking a lot to remember even an approximate distance of one particular shot when you have taken, say 20, let alone several hundred...
In addition, unless you have one subject that more or less fills the frame, and that subject is reasonably small with respect to the distance to the subject, how do you even define what the distance is?

Message edited by author 2005-11-30 17:00:44.
11/30/2005 05:00:28 PM · #14
You can go to Equipment, lenses to make a determination on how a lens works for taking photos.. remembering that not all photographers take the same type of photos..z
Originally posted by Generyc:

It is sad that people can not see the relevence of distance without coming up with silly remarks refering to the moon, landscapes etc.
surely it is obvious that distance that a shot was taken from as in my example approx. 3 metres would be a good way to assess the performance of say a 300mm lens over that of a 200mm lens or even that of a macro lens.
I feel sorry for all those that can not guess aprox. distance, how would you work out your flash exposure with a manual flash for instance.


Message edited by author 2005-11-30 17:10:09.
11/30/2005 05:02:41 PM · #15
Originally posted by Generyc:

It is sad that people can not see the relevence of distance without coming up with silly remarks refering to the moon, landscapes etc.
surely it is obvious that distance that a shot was taken from as in my example approx. 3 metres would be a good way to assess the performance of say a 300mm lens over that of a 200mm lens or even that of a macro lens.
I feel sorry for all those that can not guess aprox. distance, how would you work out your flash exposure with a manual flash for instance.


Mostly this is only relevant with studio work, and studio work is only a small percentage of photography overall. The performance of a lens at certain distances isn't something that a majority of photographers worry about, and if you have questions about certain lenses, the best way to resolve those questions are to ask people that own and use the lenses specifically.. it certainly isn't asking for a statistic that most people either don't care a whit about.. or simply don't have access to the majority of the time.
11/30/2005 05:04:03 PM · #16
I fail to see the relevance of distance in the making of a good photo.

A great photograph is a great photograph whether the distance between subject and camera is an inch or a mile (or, sigh, a light year).sigh

It's especially useless while voting on challenge entries here at DPC: all we get to see is the photo and its title. That's it. Not the camera used. Not the lens (or "lense"). Not even the photographer's name. I agree it's interesting to learn how a shot was taken, and I'll even agree distance is important in taking the photo, but it's irrelevant to whether or not the shot is any good to begin with.

Many photographers here (especially the better ones) post their process in the photographer's comments section of the photo page. I think that's plenty.
11/30/2005 05:10:02 PM · #17
I can understand you asking this question, it would also give you an idea what the lens is capable at that distance. No, macro would not be needed and neither would landscapes. But I could see asking what that 200 mm lens did at around 50 feet or 500 feet. It might also help some know if that is what they hope from their lens.Or do they new to think about new lens they are about to buy.
11/30/2005 05:23:51 PM · #18
I agree that in some specific instances it is quite valuable to know how far the photog was from the subject. It's also true, however, that in most of those cases there are visual cues as to how wide the FoV is. For example, a bird half fills a portrait-oriented frame shot at 200mm on a 10D. Given that information, I can tell you the subject distance within a reasonable margin of error, the error mainly determined by my estimate of the size of the bird. it's simple trigonometry. In a few shots, it's not apparent what the approximate linear FoV is, so there's no cue to calculate distance from. These few shots don't justify asking everyone to estimate subject distance on their shots, though. IMO, of course.
11/30/2005 05:36:40 PM · #19
Originally posted by Generyc:

It is sad that people can not see the relevence of distance without coming up with silly remarks refering to the moon, landscapes etc.
surely it is obvious that distance that a shot was taken from as in my example approx. 3 metres would be a good way to assess the performance of say a 300mm lens over that of a 200mm lens or even that of a macro lens.
I feel sorry for all those that can not guess aprox. distance, how would you work out your flash exposure with a manual flash for instance.


trying to judge the performance of a lens on a 640x480 picture is absoultely rediculous. unless people are posting 100% crop examples, and have no pictures sharpened. which they don't. Thus being why most people considered your request silly, and responded in kind.

If you wan't lens performance examples you might try googling a review.
11/30/2005 06:29:24 PM · #20
I think the point being made is that there are 3 variables in the equation that determines depth of field:

- Focal length
- Aperture
- Distance to subject

Without the 3rd, saying that you were at 200mm and f/4 doesn't really indicate what your depth of field would be.

NOTE: *NOT* that I am advocating that this be a required field. It might be handy information if you happen to know it....
11/30/2005 07:06:28 PM · #21
I really don't see the usefulness of this information. Perhaps the focal length the lense was at, but not the distacne to the subject. And even focal length is not all that helpful if you are not intimately familiar with the lense/camera it was mounted to. A lot of people here use P&S type cameras and are not familiar with SLR lense terminology/technicals or can equate that to shot difficulty/distance from subject in any reasonable manner.*

* Not meant to insult anyone, just a fact. Please don't attack me for being honest.
11/30/2005 07:08:50 PM · #22
Originally posted by Alienyst:

I really don't see the usefulness of this information. Perhaps the focal length the lense was at, but not the distacne to the subject. And even focal length is not all that helpful if you are not intimately familiar with the lense/camera it was mounted to. A lot of people here use P&S type cameras and are not familiar with SLR lense terminology/technicals or can equate that to shot difficulty/distance from subject in any reasonable manner.*

* Not meant to insult anyone, just a fact. Please don't attack me for being honest.


::gasp:: someone being attacked for honesty? never happen here. not ever.
11/30/2005 07:10:05 PM · #23
Originally posted by Alienyst:

A lot of people here use P&S type cameras and are not familiar with SLR lense terminology/technicals or can equate that to shot difficulty/distance from subject in any reasonable manner.

Aperture and focal length are terms used for both P&S and SLR. What terminology would be SLR-specific?
11/30/2005 07:10:06 PM · #24
Originally posted by Alienyst:

I really don't see the usefulness of this information. Perhaps the focal length the lense was at, but not the distacne to the subject. And even focal length is not all that helpful if you are not intimately familiar with the lense/camera it was mounted to. A lot of people here use P&S type cameras and are not familiar with SLR lense terminology/technicals or can equate that to shot difficulty/distance from subject in any reasonable manner.*

* Not meant to insult anyone, just a fact. Please don't attack me for being honest.


You have a 300mm lens. Set it to f/5.6 and focus it at something 6 feet away. Check how razor thin your DOF is. Now keeping the lens at 300mm focus it at something 100 feet away. See the difference? Huge difference.

As for different focal lengths meaning different things on different cameras ... we already submit the camera info with the picture. So that information is given.

I'm not saying it's required. But it's definitely useful information.
11/30/2005 07:22:37 PM · #25
how did everyone get off onto DOF? the guy was asking about judging lens quality via the submitted photographs... which is completely impossible unless every photo entered is uncropped, and at 100% or original pixel size.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 11/26/2020 07:14:12 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 11/26/2020 07:14:12 AM EST.