mihind24 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
If we're talking landscape, 0%.
If we're talking portraits/people, I'd say maybe 5% or so. I just haven't jumped aboard this fad of super large apertures. Yes, it can be useful for throwing distracting backgrounds out of focus. But I see that as generally lazy. In the end, many very shallow DOF photographs might as well be shot in front of a gray backdrop since you can't make out what's behind the person anyway. It takes more thought and effort to be able to compose your shot in such a way that the background adds to the photograph. I feel as if people aren't learning how to use converging lines to their advantage. I've seen a lot of photographers throw their aperture wide open yet fail to see that the subject's clothing's colors are similar to the background, when instead they could have composed differently or shot it another direction where the subject stands out against an in-focus background because of contrasting colors.
That being said, I'm not an extremist. There are times when I am forced to use a shallow DOF, and I certainly do acknowledge that they occur. My previous paragraph was just highlighting how many photographers default to that route without giving their compositions more thought. For instance, I once had 5 minutes to shoot a regional warehouse manager for a large chain due to his busy schedule. The warehouse was not the tidiest of places, and with such limited time, I resorted to f/1.2. Unfortunately, I see too many examples where there is a beautiful background that could compliment the subject so well, yet it is out of focus.
|