Focus Softly...

[Remorhaz]

Our school and local community had it's annual Christmas Carols night recently - I generally take images of the event and all the children having fun throughout the late afternoon and evening. It's a good time to shoot and I'm often found out on the oval taking nice portraits of the children in the soft light of sunset. Usually I'm shooting with a fairly open aperture with a nice lens for portraits - something like the 85/1.8, 105/2.8 or even 70-200/2.8 and I mostly go for the closest eye tack sharp with it blending quickly to blur in background and foreground - like the following...



However I also tried this (which when I found it in post I really liked) but would be interested to see what others thought or just to see if I'm just smoking crack... So C&C appreciated...

With this image it's more softly focused basically everywhere so that even my main subject child is enough (not too little and not too much ) out of focus - some might call this a technical error - however I like to think of it more as serendipity

[zafra52]

The first one is lovely, but I would crop
unnecessary space left and right. The second
is good too, but I am not sure how you can
improve it or if it needs improvement.

[chrisk]

If you hadn't have told me i wouldn't even know that it was oof or soft. It works ok i suppose cos it's not too OOF and the subject isn't looking at the camera. IMO, that sort of technique wouldn't work if it was an image like the first; which is as close to a perfect portrait as it gets.

[Matt. K]

Skin tones that just glow and perfect expressions. It doesn't get much better.

[aim54x]

I have to admit I really like #2, the separation and the out of focus, but recognisable girl in the background really make this a top notch candid.

[Remorhaz]

The first one is lovely, but I would crop unnecessary space left and right. The second is good too, but I am not sure how you can improve it or if it needs improvement.

Thanks Zafra - it wasn't so much about improvement but rather whether it worked in any way for others besides my feeble brain

If you hadn't have told me i wouldn't even know that it was oof or soft. It works ok i suppose cos it's not too OOF and the subject isn't looking at the camera. IMO, that sort of technique wouldn't work if it was an image like the first; which is as close to a perfect portrait as it gets.

Yep - I guess it's harder to tell on the web sized version but full screen (and at 100%) it's totally obvious. I guess that was the balance - a little oof but not too oof. And totally agree that it wouldn't work for the first - it needed a different look on the subject (and probably multiple subjects). NB: These two shots were taken only a minute apart.

Skin tones that just glow and perfect expressions. It doesn't get much better.

thanks Matt - it's easier with kids

I have to admit I really like #2, the separation and the out of focus, but recognisable girl in the background really make this a top notch candid.

Thanks Cam - my thinking too - I wasn't expecting to like it beforehand but it grew on me very quickly...

[biggerry]

Didn't read all teh stuff Rod except this bit

I'm just smoking crack..

However they are both nice images and the not for the technicalities, great smiles and great subject isolation, sweet stuff.