From an experimental shoot I did with a friend in April. I wanted to try the brenizer method with a long lens. I like the final outcome, but to be honest in the end I have come to the conclusion that I could have gotten the same image with one frame if I used a 50mm instead of multiple frames with a 100mm lens. Oh well, live and learn right? Soon I want to try this same method with my 50mm f/1.4 lens to see what I might be able to make with it, but for now I'm happy with this.
Shot using an original Canon 5D with a Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro USM lens attached. Lit using all natural light.
The shots I've seen using the Brenizer Method are much wider environmental shots. I don't think it's a fair comparison when you do this with a tighter headshot. I can't even imagine you used that many images to create this image. They often use 50 plus images for these.
Also, it's really about creating shallow depth of field surrounding the subject much like you see in film when shot at f/1.4 or whatever. It's usually not done with a subject like this and a background so close to the subject.
friscoron wrote:
The shots I've seen using the Brenizer Method are much wider environmental shots. I don't think it's a fair comparison when you do this with a tighter headshot. I can't even imagine you used that many images to create this image. They often use 50 plus images for these.
Also, it's really about creating shallow depth of field surrounding the subject much like you see in film when shot at f/1.4 or whatever. It's usually not done with a subject like this and a background so close to the subject.
I understand the technique behind brenizer and knew that what I was doing doesn't completely match the most commonly used application of it, but as I said I wanted to experiment with it and see what I might be able to make by applying the idea to a close-in portrait.
