Hi, I'm new to this forum and have a question.

This is a screen capture from the Smallville episode Warrior. I want to recreate a scene like this with the background completely out of focus but the main actor in focus.


http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/6389/warrior3.jpg

how would I get a similar shot with the Canon GL2? Can this be done with the manual settings?

you would need a 35mm adaptor to get something like that, or a video DSLR.

Try setting up about 15 feet from your subject and zooming to fill frame, and make sure you background is about 15 feet away from the subject. Shoot with iris as wide open as possible

Is there a way to get it without an adapter like Chris said?

Again using telelens setting, will give shallower depth of field. Using widest Iris opening creates shallower depth of field and putting you back ground farther in back of your subject will mean it is out of focus.

The small imager on a GL2 works against shallow depth of field, but f you combine all three techniques above, you may be able to get close.

I think i may just invest in a lens adapter, I found reasonably priced ones

Depth of file is an issue with all small sensor formats. You can play withe camcorder-to-subject-to-background distances, and focal lengths but that may result in perspectives you do not want.

A low budget approach is to try chroma key the actor onto a separate shot of the out-of-focus background, But artifacts could be an issue so that may or may not be adequate for your needs.

Try setting up about 15 feet from your subject and zooming to fill frame, and make sure you background is about 15 feet away from the subject. Shoot with iris as wide open as possible

I've done this with all my cameras and told others to do it as well. Works like a charm. Though it's not always possible space-wise. I will be investing in the new Canon T2i and a 50mm lens to cover that effect in any situation. Here's a shot from my HMC150...

Basically as Chris said you'll want the camera zoomed in, and the aperature to a high setting (low F-stop #, 2.4 or so). Play around with that, that's the best it'll do without adaptors.

I shoot my wife's web series in a small room converted to a studio. I place her about 6' in front of the camera and the backdrop about 6' behind her. I set my GL2 at about F2.0, 1/60th shutter (if I remember right), zoom in a little, and sometimes have trouble keeping her in focus. This has allowed me to easily keep the backdrop "soft" looking. It also helps when shooting white or black backdrops.

In other words, like Chris said, It should not be a problem so long as you control lighting conditions.

If you are doing this shot indoors you will have better luck than outdoors. Indoors there is much less light so it is easier to shoot with wide (low) f-stops ... BUT remember ... the widest (lowest) f-stop the better when trying to make the background out of focus.

The further away the background is from the subject the better the result.

Of course you would shoot with manual exposure. Don't forget you can add the Neutral Density filter if needed (even if the camera does not think you need it), but once you get a proper exposure with the lens wide open there is no need for further adjustment.

NOTE: for outdoor shots you can even add a "regular" Neutral Density filter to the front of the lens in addition to the built-in one.

NOTE: for outdoor shots you can even add a "regular" Neutral Density filter to the front of the lens in addition to the built-in one.

And that's what I do. Combining the onboard ND I have near enough 3-ND of darkness to play with. I keep the aperture WIDE open and I can get quite acceptable shallow DoF. At least it makes the layer I want pop. And yes, ultimately there is no alternative to having a BIGGER receptor and/or a DoF machine.

Hope you enjoy my sampler! Just regular SD from an XM2.

Grazie

Grazie,

Really great sample images!!!

I use the same method, but I have also used a polizer with the extra nd. when I have tons of light and don't mind a little warmer color.


Dale

Grazie, Really great sample images!!!
- Thank you Dale.

. . . but I have also used a polizer with the extra nd. when I have tons of light and don't mind a little warmer color. As I said, no post-prod in these. If I am wanting to then alter the "feel" of a piece I'd go to my beloved SONY Vegas! - Most importantly is to get the best image I can do, and afford.

Just employing some basic camera skills this camera does produce some great shots. And no it still isn't HD - that's obvious - and when I do climb that hill I'll be then reaching for even MORE dynamic from my work.

Grazie

I'll have to pick up some ND's. I am honestly quite surprised that with a wide upen aperature the DoF can be that shallow with the GL2.

Nice frame grabs by the way.

Greg

I am honestly quite surprised that with a wide upen aperature the DoF can be that shallow with the GL2. Why? Why would you think that?

When I started playing with my XM2; listened to everybody about this DoF and read further and deeper on the subject I came across articles on the web about a certain "Circle of Confusion" (CoF)! - Yes, nice term huh? Here is a link to a fabulous webpage that explains - and simply! - the correlation of wide APERTURES (with examples), and lens' lengths, which was nothing more than a revelation to me.

Now the DoF machines make this easier, if not more expensive, and highly more controllable with greater CoF leverage, leaving your XM2 a dumb receptor to that what it sees on the other side of the spinning disc. Is this still the technology?

Nice frame grabs by the way. - Thank you Greg! You might wish to try experimenting with increasing the shutter speed of the XM2 first to gauge just how much DoF you can get. Meaning this has the similar effect as putting on NDs. However, and yes, you will get other anomalies with moving objects. But at least you can gauge just what is possible WITH your aperture at its widest, and without going to the extra expense of NDs just to try this theory out. Nice tip?

Understanding Depth of Field in Photography (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm)

Grazie

A couple thoughts:


If you want to add nd filters and such I prefer to use square filters and a filter holder instead of messing with threads.


It was recommended on this forum in the past and I went with it, a cokin P series filter holder, hood and several filters. It is all rather inexpensive to be honest and easy to use. Also this lens hood can be used with the Century wide and anamorpphic lens on the gl2 as well so it has more than one use.


dale guthormsen

Dale? Did/have you gotten the similar/same results as I?

My decision was to go with True Lens Services "Kestrel" 100x100 (4"x4") setup. This WAS as a result of using a "twisty" 58mm pola from another company - nasty solution. But it did point me towards getting more savvy and educated on Filters, and so on, in general. As I was going to make a majorly expensive addition to the front of my camera, I went for the Formatt glass rather than the Cokins system. I now have 2 statics plus one rotator. During working closely with TLS over this they had adapted the Kestrel to add the further element, and now have an aluminium rotator which has valuable friction, accuracy but easy in its rotation. Rotation is paramount in using polas, and can assist creativity when using any grads. The 100x100 fits nicely over my Canon wide angle 80mm front end.

Dale, how would you rate the website link I included? Valuable or not?

Grazie

Grazie,

The Kestrel is a nice matt box. Had I the spare cash at the time I would have purchased a better rig. That is actually on the list for this spring.

The web linc on dof is awesome!!! Having been a photo major in school back in the dark ages we had this all layed out for us. I really loved the DoF calculator!!!

It also explains very clearly why the sweet spot on a lens is NOT at the greatest depth of field!! Big lenses and small aperatures definitely soften images.

To me Dof is always in a constant state of flux, relationships between subject/lens/light/ distance/ desired effects and shutter speed.

Would it not be nice to know one just need to stay at 5.6 to always get what you want!!

If one is not familar with this stuff One should reread that web site over numerous times, particularly after a shoot one is not to happy with the results!!!

It is an awesome reminder!!


thank you for sharing this with everyone!!!!


Dale