Stefan171288 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3731 times:
yesterday I had the chance to take a cabin shot of F-WSTA, prserved in paris Orly. Actually there aren't any cabin shots of this one in the database and I thought that my shot might have a chance. What do you think about it and how could it be improved. Light conditions weren't very easy because it's quite dark inside with the small windows.
Dazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2922 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3721 times:
A nice interesting shot for those who'll never get the chance to see the inside of that aircraft (me included!). Given it's a 'rare' shot in that there are no others in the DB, acceptance standards are lower. I think your main problem with this shot is depth of field. The foreground is in perfect focus but due to a larger apperture becasue of the low light, the background is not in focus. For these shots, I generally use the smallest apperture I can get away with and use centre spot focus and chose a focal point in the centre of the frame. In this case, half way along column of seats. That way, you should get the centre of the photo in focus and even out the areas which aren't in perfect focus. I don't think this shot will make it unfortunately.
Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
113312 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 574 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 10 hours ago) and read 3606 times:
My opinion is that they should take it into the DB. Considering the lighting you had to work with, it's very good. I don't think that the depth of field is that bad. Actually, it's about what the human eye would perceive when looking at the foreground. Usually, with conventional film camera, this should would have been focused in the middle with blur in close and at the distance due to the low light and required aperture. With the camera you used, it appears that you made the best use of it's capability. But, I'm not one of the screeners. If they reject, I would appeal on grounds that it cannot be taken better.