Kevin-P3

Pick an Assignment: Depth of Field

Student Name: Kevin Mobbs

Group Name: The Snapshots

Back to list



  Title: Just Us Chickens Tags: chicken, log, depth of field, animal, country Self Critique   This picture was made when working on my rule of thirds assignment. In fact, these are the very same logs containing the lichen that ended up in that assignment. At the time, I thought this photo was a good example of the ROT, but was a poor example of focusing and depth of field. It was such a waste because otherwise, I felt it was a nice photo. It was this disappointment which made me think of using it as an example of what not to do.

I plan to use it in my proposed digital photography workshop as an example of depth of field, that is, as a not-so-good example. The fact that the chickens are not focused but the fire pit is demonstrates the concept of depth of field. It is the “wrongness” of this picture that makes it a good example of the concept. We might expect the chickens to be more in focus while the background is slightly out of focus. The focus on the further object is not necessarily bad, but the fire pit is not the subject of the photo. I plan to show this in conjunction with a photo which exhibits better focusing/depth of field application.

(45-50 pts.) || 80 – 89% (40 - 44 pts.) || <80% (<40 pts.) || Critique Comments:
 * Category || Strong || Adequate || Weak ||
 * Concept || Does an outstanding job of communicating the concept. || Does an adequate job communicating the concept. || Does a poor job communicating the concept. ||
 * Composition || Photograph uses composition principles very effectively. || Photograph does a good job using composition principles. || Photograph does a poor job using composition principles. ||
 * Focus || Focus is a perfect match with the concept of the shot. || Focus is an adequate match with the concept of the shot. || Focus is a poor match with the concept of the shot. ||
 * Technical Aspects || Shutter speed and aperture were perfectly chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were adequately chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were poorly chosen and do not match the concept. ||
 * Depth of Field || Excellent use of depth-of-field. || Adequate use of depth-of-field. || Poor use of depth-of-field. ||
 * Title/tags || Title and tags were perfectly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are excellent with no mistakes. || Title and tags were adequately chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are good with only minor errors. || Title and tags were poorly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Contains multiple spelling errors or wrong word choices. ||
 * ** Instructor evaluates this section ** ||
 * Self Critique || Excellent self-assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate self-assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor self-assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * Peer Critique || Excellent peer assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate peer assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor peer assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * Peer Comments || Peer comments exceed expectations. || Peer comments meet expectations. One or two comments might be missing. || Three or more peer comments were missing, incomplete or poorly written. ||
 * Total Points || >89%
 * Total Points || >89%

Peer Critique Name: Emily Smith (45-50 pts.) || 80 – 89% (40 - 44 pts.) || <80% (<40 pts.) || Critique Comments: Emily -Kevin, I like that you were brave to include a not so good photo of depth of field here for this assignment. I think that many of us can relate to the frustration of our cameras focusing on the "wrong" thing in our photos. I think this would be an excellent way to introduce this concept in a photography class. What suggestions would you give students on how to correct the depth of field issue? I have had issues with this concept with my own camera. I would suggest that you also show the corrected or "right" depth of field in conjunction with the "wrong" one.
 * Category || Strong || Adequate || Weak ||
 * Concept || Does an outstanding job of communicating the concept. || Does an adequate job communicating the concept. || Does a poor job communicating the concept. ||
 * Composition || Photograph uses composition principles very effectively. || Photograph does a good job using composition principles. || Photograph does a poor job using composition principles. ||
 * Focus || Focus is a perfect match with the concept of the shot. || <span style="background-color: #00ff00; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;">Focus is an adequate match with the concept of the shot. || Focus is a poor match with the concept of the shot. ||
 * Technical Aspects || <span style="background-color: #00ff00; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;">Shutter speed and aperture were perfectly chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were adequately chosen to match concept. || Shutter speed and aperture were poorly chosen and do not match the concept. ||
 * Depth of Field || Excellent use of depth-of-field. || <span style="background-color: #00ff00; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;">Adequate use of depth-of-field. || Poor use of depth-of-field. ||
 * Title/tags || <span style="background-color: #00ff00; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;">Title and tags were perfectly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are excellent with no mistakes. || Title and tags were adequately chosen and written to express the content and concept. Spelling and word choice are good with only minor errors. || Title and tags were poorly chosen and written to express the content and concept. Contains multiple spelling errors or wrong word choices. ||
 * ** Instructor evaluates this section ** ||
 * Self Critique || Excellent self-assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate self-assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor self-assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * Peer Critique || Excellent peer assessment. Written comments meet or exceed requirements. || Adequate peer assessment. Written comments meet requirements. || Poor peer assessment. Written comments do not meet requirements. ||
 * Peer Comments || Peer comments exceed expectations. || Peer comments meet expectations. One or two comments might be missing. || Three or more peer comments were missing, incomplete or poorly written. ||
 * Total Points || >89%
 * Total Points || >89%

Other Comments: Jacki - Kevin, I think your use of this picture will be great. I think we have all experienced this frustration when our cameras are focused on something other than what we want them to be focused on. I think the picture would be really great if the focus was on the chickens and the fire pit was in the background. I love the one chicken standing above the rest! The one suggestion I have that may have helped is to get the shot from a lower angle, which I am sure is hard to do with live chickens! But the focus may have come forward to the chickens.

Donna- Kevin, I actually like this photograph a lot. While it is unfocused, the colors are awesome. How did you get that one chicken on the right to pose for you?:) I think your photo demonstrates ROT quite well.

Mike - Kevin, even though you say that the firepit is the focus, I focus on the chicken on the right first. Once again, the rule of thirds wins out. I don't know what camera you use, but I found that my Kodak camera at school has a multi-point focus and it will sometimes focus better on multi-point instead of center-point. I, like the others, like the fact that you are using this photo to demonstrate a "not-so-good" depth of field. Depth of field is still something that gets me many times. I tend to try to have everything in focus that I can and not so much just a part of the photo. I would also like to see this picture the way you originally intended it to be. Please try again. Good self critique and good description.