Beginner Focusing Problems

Messages
17
Name
Helen
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello, I am a beginner and I really love photographing jewellery but I am having problems with blurring and I am wondering if some one can help me.

If I photograph a brooch, for example, I focus in on it and shoot and everything is great. It comes out nice and clear. But if I photograph a necklace I will focus in on the pendant and the chain will come out blurry or I will focus in on the chain and the pendant with come out blurry. It's really ruining my photographs!

How do I get everything in focus at the same time?

Thank you.
 
Its Depth of Field at play (DOF)

The aperture you are selecting on your lens will determine to what degree parts of the object you are shooting are naturally out of focus.

One way to solve the issue would be to try and shoot it straight on rather than at an angle and close down you aperture.

What lens and lens settings are you using?
 
I am using AF-S Nikkor 18-55 mm and I am using F5.6 aperture, 1600 ISO (it is very dark where I am) and a shutter speed of between 150 and 200.
 
At f5.6 im guessing you are shooting at 55mm.

Unless you can shoot the necklace straight on you will have issues with depth of field.

The best solution in the interim is to close your aperture down between f8 and f11.
Doing so though will bring other issues though as it sounds like your not using flash hence your high ISO.

As a trial change your aperture to the above and see if you can get a respectable shutter speed and ISO you will see how the DOF changes and brings more into focus.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you are photographing at an angle (e.g. jewellery on a table and you on the side of the table) you will need greater depth of field and even that may not be enough if you get close, e.g. f16. If you could have the camera right above the item looking straight down depth of field will not be (much of) an issue. To start with use some table lights to light the items if it is too dark where you are.
 
I am using AF-S Nikkor 18-55 mm and I am using F5.6 aperture, 1600 ISO (it is very dark where I am) and a shutter speed of between 150 and 200.

There's a free depth of field calculator at:
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Just put in what camera and lens you use, it comes up with a Canon camera and standard zoom lens which is probably close enough to what you use.

At 30cm distance using f5.6 at 55mm you get a depth of field (in focus area) of about 50mm.
Your lens focuses on a plane (as in a sheet of paper) - in this case a sheet of paper 50mm thick!
 
Thank you Stupar and TLR, I didn't know that aperture and angle affected depth of field. I will try your suggestions. Thanks loads.
 
@ Stupar

When you say try and get a respectable ISO and shutter speed, what do you mean? Do you think mine is unsuitable for what I am photographing? What should I be aiming for?

Thank you.
 
@ Stupar

When you say try and get a respectable ISO and shutter speed, what do you mean? Do you think mine is unsuitable for what I am photographing? What should I be aiming for?

Thank you.
Not so much unsuitable but more a case of if you stick with ISO 1600 but close your aperture down your shutter speed gets slower.

Its trying to get the balance between a decent shutter speed, lowest ISO possible but getting a large enough DOF.

If you thing you are steady enough you could get away with a shutter speed of between 1/50 and 1/100 as your subject matter doesnt move.
 
This might help you understand the relationship between aperture, shutter and ISO and how they worh together
exposuretrianglediagram-800x713.jpg
 
Look up the effect of aperture on depth of focus. Find out the maximum depth of focus you can get from your preferred lens and printing/viewing size. Then you must arrange your necklace so that no part of it exceeds the the distance range of your available depth of focus.

If that's not enough, then you need to study focus stacking techniques.
 
* The' Light' (above) is the amount reaching the sensor, not the light lighting the subject.
 
* The' Light' (above) is the amount reaching the sensor, not the light lighting the subject.
I’m pleased you clarified that, I was just thinking it was the wrong way around.
 
I’m pleased you clarified that, I was just thinking it was the wrong way around.
Assuming a constant light source, I should also have said.

It confused me at first and I've been doing it for 40 years...
 
I’m pleased you clarified that, I was just thinking it was the wrong way around.
Or how to compete for the most complicated but technically correct answer to a very simple question ... but nobody asked in case it was a full frame camera and the issue was vignetting.
 
Or how to compete for the most complicated but technically correct answer to a very simple question ... but nobody asked in case it was a full frame camera and the issue was vignetting.
It's a Nikon D50, I looked :)
 
Or a tripod?
If you do a lot of this it would be a worth while investment, you wouldn't need an expensive one either.
With a tripod, the exposure length can be as long as needed, allowing the ISO to be kept low and the aperture set for optimum depth of field.
 
Good advice above but I definitely agree about a tripod. Sometimes I photograph examples of hand dyed wool and garments and it is just so much easier with a tripod. Framing of the subject is easier and as noted above it gives you more freedom with ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

Dave
 
A tripod is an absolute must have for product photography.
Set the aperture small enough to get a good depth of field, set a low ISO to maintain image quality and let the shutter speed take care of itself. Doesn't matter if it's 1/2 second or 10 seconds - no camera shake. You are shooting Aperture Priority, or even manual, aren't you?
 
Or a tripod?
If you do a lot of this it would be a worth while investment, you wouldn't need an expensive one either.
With a tripod, the exposure length can be as long as needed, allowing the ISO to be kept low and the aperture set for optimum depth of field.
That's what I was going to say.

Plus there are two other benefits to a tripod.

1. Your composition / framing is fixed once you've got the camera on the tripod, so you can adjust the lighting to improve the image; if you do it hand-held you don't have the same level of repeatability.

2. You can focus manually, check whether you've got the depth of field in the right place, and then tweak if necessary. Again it's the guaranteed repeatability that's important.
 
Some informative advice above, but I have to say back-up....

You are doing 'close up' photography, which is something of a specialization...if you attempted it with a camera-phone or compact, you would likely get better results, than with a DSLR. This is because all lenses have a near-focus limit, and the longer the focal length (more zoom!), so the further from the subject that tends to be.

Take note; For the Nikon DSLR's 'kit' 18-55mm lens, that near focus limit is about a foot; you will not get anything any closer in good focus.

In a Camera phone or other small-sensor consumer camera, they have a much smaller sensor behind the lens, so to get the same angle of view, they use a much shorter lens, which co-incidentally have much closer near-focus limits.

I have a little micro-sensor action-cam, that has a lens with just a 4.5mm focal length, this has such a short focal length, that it is essentially focus free; The near focus limit is so close to the camera, and the range or critical focus before it gives 'infinity focus' ie everything in focus, similarly so close to the camera, that its factory set somewhere just before hyper focal, and everything from just a few mm in front of the camera will always be 'in focus'. so it does't actually have to have an adjustable focus mechanism, or complicated automatic focus system to work it.

That lens gives approx the same angle of view as a 20mm lens on my DSLR, or a 35mm lens on my 35mm Film Camera, or an80 mm lens on a 120 roll-film camera; B-U-T as the 'sensor' or film behind the lens gets larger, so the lens gets longer to give the same Angle of View so the 'near focus' limit tends gets further from the camera, and the range of 'critical' focus becomes that much larger.

Ie: on a bigger fancier camera, focus gets more critical! And the first bit of advice is simply to 'Back-Up'.. move further from your subject, make sure everything you want 'n focus' is at least further than a foot from the lens, and... use less zoom! Don't try and fill the frame with so much subject,and everything will start to become 'easier'

Backing up metaphorically, the exposure triangle and DoF effects are all interesting and good stuff, but jumping a little to a solution without understanding the problem....

There's two or three reasons for blurry pictures.. the first is nailing focus, and as above, the near-focus limit, can be a problem for close-up photography. Associated with that is the matter of Depth of Field or how much front to back focus you get in a scene, which can get complicated, but again, closer you are to your subject, the more critical this will be.

The 18-55 kit lens at 50mm zoom' setting, focused at 0.30cm only has a Depth of Field of about 6mm! But, Back Up, and at 1m you have about 80mm DoF, at 3m, about 80cm of DoF. Ie the further you are from your subject, so you get exponentially more DoF....or the other way about; closer you get to your subject, so exponentially the DoF drops and focus becomes that much more critical... and that is completely irrespective of the F-Number.

Next is motion blurr. Usual example of this is 'action' photography of a stationary camera and a moving subject. Imagine taking a photo of a car moving across the frame. Lets say that the car is traveling at 20mph, or about 36Km/h... that's 10 meters per second... a car is about 3m long, so if you have a shutter speed of 1/50th of a second, the car will have moved about 20cm or half the length of a side window in the time between the shutter starting to open, and the shutter closing.... and the pillar between doors will streak into the widows either side, and the car will get a bit blurry.... turn that inside out, and park the car, but dont hold the camera all that steady! Now you get the same effect of 'streaking' depending how much the camera moves in relation to the car.

Now, put the two scenarios together, and get up close; at 30cm range you 'only' have 6mm of DoF, and your focus is incredibly critical; you only need breath in and have the camera shift a few mm and you have moved your focus completely out of the DoF zone or possibly completely off the subject you had originally focused on,

This is the reason for the advice to use a tripod; but that only works properly if you also use a remote release so you don't jolt the camera when pressing the shutter.. and the focus is good to start with.

You also have issues with Auto-Focus cameras in that the auto-focus system is trying to guess what in the scene it should focus on; computers are absolutely fantastic at measuring things ad doing sums... but they are completely clueless as to what they are looking at or what they should be measuring! In a modern DSLR there's a lot of fancy electronics trying to nail focus for you, and there's probably a fair few different 'focus' modes the options menus for how many red dots the thing tries to use, or which ones it gives priority to and stuff like that.... but... they are far from the most reliable bit of automation in a camera, and it wont help them any if the camera is moving a little whilst it tries to pick its target and do the sums, especially if that focus is that much more critical because the subject is so close!! More reason to use a tripod, OR, just turn the ruddy thing off and focus the lens yourself by what you see through the view finder!

I do have to say though that the Nik-Kit 18-55, great lens as it is for the lack of money it doesn't cost, effectively given away 'free' with the camera body, it is a jack-of all-trades, it is not optimized either for 'close up' or 'macro' photography, nor for 'manual focus' operation... I m not knocking it, it is my 'most used' lens on my DSLR, and after buying some very expense lenses to get the sort of range I have for film cameras, I have struggled to find anything significantly 'better' to justify 'upgrading' from it! BUT, it is an all-round general purpose lens, and it isn't the best either for close up work or manual focus operation.

For more 'serious' close up photography, exponents will possibly use 'macro' lenses, better optimized for close focus, or more seriously extension tubes or extension 'bellows', to change the lens' 'near focus' limit, which will usually render any AF inoperative and they will have to focus manually, ad they will likely choose a dedicated 'manual focus'lens, that will usually have a much greater range of focus travel and a better controlled focus action, making it 'easier' to manually nail critical focus at that sort of subject range... but again, back-up.. that's heading into the realms of solutions before understanding the problem....

Thing is what you got is the kit 18-55 lens, and it just isn't the ideal it of kit for this more specialized genre of photography you are trying to tackle... so you need to help it out a bit!

For where you are at, the thing to recognize is that you are trying to tackle a more specialized genre of photography, at the same time, trying to get to grips with a very 'convoluted' camera that has an awful lot of 'twiddle-ability'.. you can get completely lost in the trees looking for the wood, there; and more advice and explanation of that advice can just be planting more saplings!

KISS IT! Keep, It Simple Silly!...the 'problem' is bluriness... nailing focus.. recognisng what you are trying is one of the ore tricky things for the Camera to do.. back off; dont have such high expectations. Work on the basics.

Dont try and fill the frame with 'so'much subject. Back Off, give yourself space between camera and subject, give the camera and yourself a better chance to nail focus. Don't use so much zoom, for more chance still.

Work on your hand-holding technique, keeping the camera steady. Its a lot cheaper than a tripod! Use the optical view-finder, and cradle the camera, right hand holding the grip, left supporting the lens and operating the focus ring, and... possibly the focus control with the AF switched off. Tuck your elbows into your wast, keep your feet slightly apart, and give the camera the best steady support you can.

Holding the camera at almost arms length using the preview screen on the back like you'd hold a camera phone, first rather defeats buying a sophisticated Single-Lens-Reflex Camera, that has a sophisticated periscope mechanism in it to let you look through the lens that takes the photo, for starters! But also, using the review screen begs you hold the camera at arms length, away from your body, where you dont have the steadiest support, and with a larger, bulkier camera it's going to wobble! It's just not good basic, fundamental, ad pretty simple' technique.

Next up, learn to breath! More backed up super-simple stuff, to keep the camera as steady as you can. And be gentle with the buttons! squeeze the shutter release gently! Don't stab it or try and crush the camera!

When my daughter was doing her O-Level photography course, she, I ad my O/H did a little 'shutter-speed-limbo'; to see just how steady we could hand-hold a camera. Quite interesting results, but ham-fisted O/H really struggled! She'd either 'stab' the shutter and make the camera shake when she pressed it, or she would squeeze it so hard she was twisting the whole camera through about 20 degrees of rotation past the shutter releasing! Sometimes both! Be Gentle!

A couple of interesting side facts for you; Ad-Men's claims in the brochures often say things like Image Stabilization, or IS on a lens can let you hand hold 'up to' three stops slower shutter speed.... it's a bit backwards that....but really that sort of claim only holds true if your hand holding technique is not that great to start with..

Old rule-of-thumb used to be that you could had-hold down to a shutter speed of about 1 over the lens' focal length; so if you were using a 35mm lens, you could hand hold down to about 1/30th, a 50mm lens, down to about 1/60th, a 135mmlens, about 1/125th, and anythng longer you needed 1/250th or higher...

Daughter, starting out was hand-holding quite well, and managing, with 50mm lens, to hand hold 'down' to around 1/25th without IS turned on; with it she maybe got as low as 1/15th.. that's not quite a full stop's difference. Remarkably, six months later, she was hand-holding a 135 portrait lens in fairly poor light, and doing so quite successfully, without IS down to about 1/30th! Practice of age, saw me get a bit lower and able to hand hold without IS to about 1/15th, maybe 1/8th... So Image Stabilization, can make a difference, but not 'that' much, and good technique an do a bit better.... most revealing it of the exercise was the O/H, who struggled to keep it un-fuzzy, even at 1/focal length, WITH the image stabilization! If your technique is that poor to start with, then it doesn't have a hope really, ad wont make up for the short-comings.. to wit good technique is always better than expensive technology! So learn to hold the camera properly! It is back up basics; that just 'work' and make every-thing work better!

Hence, the KISS philosophy, and backing up to core basics skills, before getting all technical.

Trouble with asking questions like this on a photo-forum,is that if you ask four photographers a question you'll get a dozen answers and three arguments! Its all too easy to get bogged down in the techicalities.. and YES, trying to tackle close up photography you are dabbling in the margins of specialization... but, its like learning basic first aid, and being taught the techniques of a surgeon! There's a heck of a lot in the middle to be learned, but, you really need to start by learning how to use a safety-pin, and not dismissing it as something so-simple, it ought to be 'obvious'.. it may.. but, you need to start with the basics first, or you get gaps and wobbly bits in the wall, where the less 'obvious' has been missed.

For where you are at, suggestion that a macro lens or extension bellows or a tripod would 'help' at this stage probably wont work; like the fancy camera, will be planting more saplings in the forest to stop you finding the wood. Keep t Simple Silly... back up, work on the basics; back off, dot get so close, dot try for such ambitious frame filling shots, learn the basics, learn to get the best you can fro hand holding, and to nail focus giving the gear you got the easiest time, you can.. then you can work forwards from there, on a firm foundation, and if you want to start buying more specialized gear, you will have much easier time getting to grips with it, and get better results, having learned to give it the best chance through good technique.
 
Trouble with asking questions like this on a photo-forum,is that if you ask four photographers a question you'll get a dozen answers and three arguments! Its all too easy to get bogged down in the techicalities..
Absolutely agree. I am always certain of what I stand for, therefore I have at least two solid opinions on everything.
 
Ok - if it's a Nikon D50, not the most recent camera, I think I'd stick to a max of 400 iso (say) - the shots will be less 'noisy' - and say f11 - this will force you towards having (1) a tripod and / or (2) adding more light. A tripod needs to be a solid one and costs money, whereas you likely have light to hand - maybe a desklight or two would help? Lighting is something to play with because it doesn't just have quantity, but quality too, both in the sense of colour temperature and in how it falls on things. The spectrum of fluorescents can be a bit weird, so I'd rather stick to halogen bulbs / led's. It CAN be done on a budget. Reflections can be awkward - something to look for. Think about handy materials to reflect / diffuse light.
 
Helen was last seen October 13th...
 
Hello Helen,

There are two possible reason blurring photographs one is software is not supported and other is hardware is damaged. if I suggest you need a recovery or blurring photographs problem solver software or specialist.
 
Hello Helen,

There are two possible reason blurring photographs one is software is not supported and other is hardware is damaged. if I suggest you need a recovery or blurring photographs problem solver software or specialist.

I agree with Ben.

Have you followed the thread..........would you care to explain what it is you are trying to describe & suggest as a solution???
 
Back
Top