Potential dead horse: how bad is FF's deep DoF disadvantage?

Started Mar 5, 2014 | Discussions thread
enemjii Senior Member • Posts: 1,889
Re: SmartPhones and Shallow DoF - no large sensors needed

Allan Olesen wrote:

enemjii wrote:

Lee Jay wrote:

There was a big thick fence mesh between me and the bird, because this was at the zoo. You need a real, large-aperture to be able to blur the foreground out and effectively see around all that mesh.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay

Easy. Too easy actually. All I need is to write a piece of logic to "blur fence"

No. You also need a piece of logic to recreate the missing detail of the bird where it was covered by the fence.

without stereoscopic vision, how can even a camera take picture of something that is being blocked?

For example, If I have my finger in from of my lens, and I focus on the man standing 10 feet away, it will not be a clear picture.

when it comes to thin wires, the defocusing effect spreads the wire so thinly across the lens that you can barely see it, but it is not the same as not having the fence in the first place.

But to answer your question in case of thin wire fences, the software can interpolate and create those areas without any significant loss in detail. It is done in movies all the time. CGI. You've heard of it. right?

 enemjii's gear list:enemjii's gear list
Sony SLT-A65 Sony a77 II Sony DT 55-300mm F4.5-5.6 SAM Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM Sigma 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow