In this exercise I explored the differences in the image captured when a subject fills the frame when a long focal length is used and when a subject fills the frame when a short focal length is used. To carry out this exercise I found a subject with some depth to it. I attached my 70-200mm lens to my Canon 50d camera and set the lens to 121mm, the longest focal length I could use to capture my chosen subject. I composed the scene such that my chosen subject filled the frame. This involved me walking away from my subject first. I then attached my 10-22mm lens and setting the lens to 10mm I walked towards my subject until it once again filled the frame. The results can be found below.
 |
| Focal length: 121mm |
 |
| Focal length: 10mm |
You may be wondering why I set my telephoto lens to 121mm rather than 200mm in the first image. The reason for this is that the subject was on top of a hill and were I to walk any further away than where I was when I captured the first image the ground would have obscured the subject.
The two images captured are dramatically different even though the field of view has been maintained by changing viewpoint. In the first image, taken at a relatively long focal length, the image seems flat. The back wall of the hut does not seem too far from the columns at the front. The columns are parallel and even and the proportions of the hut seem even and as they were observed with the eye. The image captured at this longer focal length feels clean, orderly and in proportion.
In the second image, taken at the shortest focal length available to me, the hut feels much deeper. The back wall of the hut is clearly some distance from the columns at the front. The columns themselves are no longer parallel. Instead the columns form diagonals, sprouting out from the ground and exploding away from the centre. The roof appears to be far flatter than in the first image. The diagonals formed by the columns give the second image a more dynamic feel than the first image.
No comments:
Post a Comment