Focus points for landscapes!

I am busy reading all I can get a hold of on the subject of landscapes!........What I want to achieve are shots which are as sharp from front to back as possible,do I go down the road of hyperfocal distances or small aperture to increase the dof?.I have experimented with focussing a third of the way into the shot and this seems to work while shooting @ F18/22 and this seems to work to a point!......any suggestions from our resident landscape experts?.I must add that I dont use Photoshop or the like, so multiple exposure etc are a no no.......thanks very much.........Ken

This is a handy tool link

Hyperfocal distance AND small aperture AND a tripod AND some Grads are the way to go.

and if charts are too complicated for me, I mean you....here's a basic rule of thumb:
focus 1/3 the way into your scene (pick a spot about a third of the way between the nearest and furthest points you want sharp) , and set an aperture of f16 and check your Depth of Feild preview...

I've experimented with Hyperfocal distance, still carry the charts around, but to be honest I've never been 100% happy with the results as distant objects have tended to look just a little too soft for my liking...

I generally focus on the main feature I definitely want sharp and then adjust the F stop to suit what I have in the foreground. Normally I'm shooting between 12 - 20mm and vary aperture from F11-F13, rarely F16 (which can actually make images softer due to diffraction limits). This technique tends to produce the results I want much moreso than using Hyperfocal Distance

simon

good point, I should've mentioned that f16 is a good starting point, but you'll want to check your dof preview, and try opening up a stop, or more, as long as you're getting enough dof.

I usually shoot at around F11 when doing landscapes too.I find it depends greatly on the lens being used and i mean even between same focal length lenses.
Roy

Thanks very much my friends!.....seems there are no hard and fast rules in landscape photography...I'll just keep experimenting and see what I can come up with,,,thanks again..........Ken

Then you haven't looked!

There's no shortage of "rules" and I would point you in the direction of any one of thousands of books on the subject. Know the rules first and then learn how to manipulate the knowledge to make images with originality and impact. But you do need to know the rules first.

Thank you John!........I am in the middle of my third book on landscape photography,while I have taken in the basics, different people have different ideas!....as on the blog here,aperture from F11 to F16!.. I have a couple in my portfolio of the Roman wall, shot with an old Hoya 28mm, these were shot at F22 and I was quite happy with them, however the 16/45 is better at F13. As you say I must manipulate the knowledge to my own ends, and see what I can come up with,after all that is what makes photography so compelling!......thanks again John!..........Ken

I think equipment and technical detials are useful, but understanding composition and light is more important.

"S" curves, converging lines, repeating elements, rule of thirds, saddle compostion, color theory, etc are the elements many people overlook. What lens? What aperture? What camera? get asked about too often, in my opinion.

Or worse - what make of camera
Absolutely agree. When you get so hung up on equipment it's good to take a step back and look at composition/basic theory/colour again
Interestingly, there's not as much information about basic composition skills - it's more about "How should you use equipment x,y,z"
Matt

In the last view camera magazine I purchased there were some beautiful soft focus portraits. They were created by gluing a 50p magnifying glass to a lens board of a view camera. As there was no shutter, exposure was achieved by turning the lights off, uncovering the lens and then firing off a diffused flash/flashes. Sometimes we all --- and I include myself in this --- get so obsessed with the technicalities, feeding our LBA, worrying about kit, that we forget to make pictures. Second only to the pleasure one gets in making a good picture is when knowledgeable colleagues like it too. Now, I just need to find something autumnal...

[quote:3496ace15f="MattMatic"] I think ultimately the problem is that no-one actually knows 100% what makes a great photograph..."rules" about composition etc are helpful guidelines but by no means certain to produce great shots, it's so much easier to tell someone how to operate a piece of technology and explain the technicalities of a lens.

If there was an answer to the "what makes a great photo" question we'd all be Ansel Adams

simon

As a generalisation, looking at the images produced for competitions by members of - ADAPS www.adaps.org.uk - there are quite a few photographers who produce fantastic shots but who have a very limited knowledge of photographic rules and theory. They don't let this worry them in the slightest, although they do want to learn more so that they can express more in their images.

These non-technical photographers can be so much better than those who have a total grasp of the theory. Maybe the reason is that they are looking at the image first and the kit is a secondary consideration. At the other extreme are the hight technically proficient who, when film was around, would always be shooting a "test film" but never seemed to get to anyhting more than very sharp images of static subjects.

I don't know when ADAPS updated its website, but it should be congratulated on producing a very simple, clean, and effective design.

G