Compression is Real

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
OP JackM Veteran Member • Posts: 8,463
You make my point for me.

Great Bustard wrote:

JackM wrote:

The examples of "compression" (or, more appropriately, "perspective") below are due entirely to the position of the camera and positions of elements in the frame. If one had used 100mm from the same position that the 400mm photo was taken from, the "compression" would have been the same, but the framing would have been 4x wider.

Which is a totally impractical, meaningless comparison.

So, for sure, we can say that *for a given framing*, "compression" is a function of the focal length *for a given format*.

There it is. It should go without saying when comparing different approaches to taking a particular kind of picture - a portrait, a group shot, a landscape, etc - that the framing of your subject should remain the same.

The anti-compression camp is only right when you stay the same distance from your subject, and change the focal length. Anyone who thinks it's reasonable to compare a wide landscape with a tight portrait is no longer talking about photography. Anyone who thinks it's reasonable to compare a full resolution image with a tiny crop is no longer talking about photography.

However, the problem with saying that "compression" is due to focal length

Which I didn't say.

 JackM's gear list:JackM's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow