I'd like this thread to explore pictures with an emphasis on focus (or lack thereof) as a tool. Share your images where you used focus to highlight or emphasize some aspect of the composition.

Starting with this agave, which I've taken dozens of pictures of. Can't help myself, it's so photogenic. But rather than go for the view from above, with full radial symmetry and even focus, I took this picture from the side, knowing that part of the image would be out of focus. By focusing on the central bud, I tried to create a sense of origin, and the out-of-focus parts almost seem like they are in motion (to my deteriorating eyesight and overactive imagination, anyway).

Now I'm a total amateur at photography, as I suppose is evident from the results of my little experiment. So I'd love to see some more expert pictures from y'all, with a couple sentences of explanation about how you used focus to make them more interesting.

I teach photograph including, in many classes, a 45 min. section on focus. Focus is critical towards getting the results you seek. I cannot type well enough to share it all here. Sorry. For any one given subject, mood, feeling, idea that you are trying to capture and share, there is only one place to focus. Baja did it correctly in his picture. Gene

I do encourage everyone to try focusing at different places in each shot they take. This might help you discover the correct answer. Here is another suggestion. Study any picture I have ever posted on this forum. Focus is spot on. If it wasn't the shot would have been immediately deleted.

I use my touch screen to select a focal point and let the camera do the rest. It usually turns out pretty good. I agree it can be helpful to shift the focus around in a given shot, then see how the product turns out differently. It's really easy to delete the extra pictures.

I have greatly enjoyed your cat and bird pics, among others, Gene.

Another photo here where I was going for a certain effect, namely the flowers standing out like beacons above a slightly hazy stem. So I pulled the focus all the way forward. It's like a head shot with the focus on the tip of the nose, or something like that. The plant is kinda blobular to start with, so I think the effect worked.

Never focus on the tip of the nose.

Baja, this is a really good thread, thanks for starting it.



Not really selective focus, but this is the most common way - for me at least - to use focus, and actually even more importantly, focal length to create an image which simply gives the flowers all the attention and gets the background so out of focus and undistracting as possible. Here I used a 300 mm lens at f/11. A widely used, easy and no-nonsense technique. Pretty much always works. The background is actually so out of focus, that most people don't even think about it. It really is nothing. However, the background is not so much out of focus that it feels plastic, it still has a slightly organic feel to it.


A photo from my garden in 2017, Crown Imperial 'Rubra' behind tulip 'Poppie'. In the background there are more Crown Imperials.

It was shot with the same 300 mm lens as above, but with the aperture wide open at f/2.8. Here I wanted to convey the feel of the garden so wanted both a little background and foreground, but I still wanted the Crown Imperials to stand out, so there is never any unclarity about what the real subject is.



The same 300 mm f/2.8 lens, but this time with an added 1.7 teleconverter and selective focus on the flower only. Shot at f/5 to give it a bit of a dreamy feel.


Striped Squill (Puschkinia scilloides)

The same 300mm lens at f/3.5. Here I take advantage of tall out of focus foreground grass to seemingly make the Striped Squill rise from nothing. You can also use other out of focus objects for similar effects, but grass is probably the easiest to start with. Many that are not familiar with photographic techniques mistake this effect to be something that is created by post processing, but actually it all happens in camera.

Your 2nd pix has way too much OOF in the foreground. Rest are looking good.

Thank you Dirt, Rick and Joshua for the acorns.

Gene, you have a good eye, thank you. You are definitely correct about the second image. The out of focus tulips draws the eye a little more than I intended, also their very strong color doesn't help. So the image isn't as efficient as it could have been.

Those are some impressive shots, William. I am not nearly as skilled and typically still use a degree of auto focus (my current phone camera is much better than my last point-and-shoot, so the focus is set by tapping on the part of the image of interest). I have used manual focus a bit more on my video camera, however, as in certain circumstances the auto focus does not go where I want it to. Learning more photography skills is on my to-do list and certainly something I am interested in doing at some point, but unfortunately there are other things competing for my time that take higher priority.

I would think that just hanging around here is a good way to learn. For me it is, anyway. Yes, William, I really liked those pictures, especially the way you made the subjects of the photos look like they are surrounded by other plants in a garden.

William et al. a word of warning. OOF fore grounds are a no-no 95% of the time. OOF backgrounds are fine, expected, normal, pleasing, etc. Most of the time the difference between a good pix and a great pix is the background.

Regarding that last part, this native plant picture is one of my favorites because it shows the plant in bloom (obviously) against a background that has special meaning (not so obviously). The seed for this plant came from the exact spot on the peninsula out there that is cut by the inflorescence. Right at that intersection, on the other side of the peninsula, above the water. So the background is a bit of an origin story as well.



Not to get too far off topic, this is what the original (Canon) version of the image looked like, before I took it to Photoshop to fix the light.

Most interesting scenery. If you had taken the picture at a different time of the day you might not have to use Photoshop. Getting us back toward the topic of focus, one reason it is so important to get focus correct - it cannot be cured in post processing. If either you or the camera missed the correct focus you can immediately delete the picture.

Blooms from a Dick Clark rose I trimmed yesterday. Here I just wanted to draw attention to the more beautifully formed bloom and have the background fade as much as possible.

Baja_Costero said:Regarding that last part, this native plant picture is one of my favorites because it shows the plant in bloom (obviously) against a background that has special meaning (not so obviously). The seed for this plant came from the exact spot on the peninsula out there that is cut by the inflorescence. Right at that intersection, on the other side of the peninsula, above the water. So the background is a bit of an origin story as well.

Baja, I think you did good work with the post process and it is an interesting story. My only small suggestion would be a little crop from the left, to remove the two distracting branches and to put your plant a little of center.

_Bleu_ said:Blooms from a Dick Clark rose I trimmed yesterday. Here I just wanted to draw attention to the more beautifully formed bloom and have the background fade as much as possible.

You have captured the bloom well with the shallow depth of field.
If you are looking for ways to make your rose stand out even more, you can try to photograph it against a more uniform background - inside it could be a wall, outside grass usually works very well.

That's right, William. This was a test shot, though. I purposely chose a busy background to see how much fading I could achieve at that distance/light conditions. Of several shots, this was the one with the best focus and the most fading.

Achieving focus is always a bit of an adventure for me maintaining it is impossible
Okay so, back to photography--not sure if this works as an example,
vs

I was going for the wild glowing colors and the veins in the standards. 100mm, f/5.6, at twilight
I decided that the first is a better picture overall because the background was more homogeneous and further away from the subject so it kind of became irrelevant. In the second, I'm quite fond of the perspective on the iris and the glow and the veins, but, the other irises and leaves in the background, although blurred, are still unpleasant, blobby-spiky distractors. They aren't quite close enough to be part of the subject as a group shot and they are too close to be a decent background.
With the shorter focal length of a 100mm lens, backgrounds don't stack and fade away quite like they do with a longer focal length. I have discovered with repeated shots like the second one, that it really helps if I can find an angle of 'isolation'. Really hard to do with everything all jammed together in my gardens though, and limited space for me to get access.

Yes, the second shot does have a much busier background and the focus is off a touch. Composition wise, do not have any background flowers overlap, touch the front flower in the image. Concentrate on what is the subject: one flower or a group?

Background aside, the second photo has a greater sense of mystery, the flower seeming to unfold and the center just hidden away. Less a sculpture, more a living thing. I like both photos!