On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 00:56:01 +0100, Tim Nikias
<JUS### [at] gmxnetWARE> wrote:

>John wrote:
>>> If you've got plenty of time try to add a focal blur :-)
>> 
>> Please don't do that it always looks like you are just trying to copy
>> a photo not render a realistic scene.
>
>I think it depends. Some focal blur *is* realistic after all, but only 
>if you're actually taking a photo of something in the foreground or such 
>where you'd need a lense. Try looking at various Photographer's sites 
>and check their "focal blur". Depending on the scene, it might really add.
>
>But on this one, I agree. Landscape images seldomly have focal blur. 
>It's most common on extreme close-ups that something in the background 
>gets blurred. Or on miniatures, because those are close-ups as well, but 
>don't look like it from the setting. ;-)
>
>Regards,
>Tim

I well understand focal blur.  If I say it myself I am quite a good
photographer.   With my macro photography I try as much as possible to
get rid of it.   As far as I am concerned the only time that focal
blur is realistic is when you are trying to simulate a photograph.

If you are trying to simulate what your brain "sees" then there is no
place for focal blur.

(In my opinion trhat is <grin>)

John

Post a reply to this message