Your camera-lady did an amazing job of capturing you capture the mushrooms. Thanks for all the detailed info; I’ll be honest 95% of that went over my head but now I know what to search, thanks
Interesting commentary from Alan. I agree with the focusing aesthetic on some levels. I see where you show in another video ‘stacking focus’ techniques. And your point about lighting. The focus aesthetic goes back into the 1920s arising with adjustable back large format cameras. One has to ask though what is the point artistically of focus? There is a science argument so to speak for well focused pictures in the sense of ‘knowing’ what is seen. Even that is very variable because there is a wide range of reasons to know what to look at scientifically. So some people use infrared as their departure for images. This artificial color can be striking, but gets away from asking about focus. Another way to ask the question is to observe focus in vision. So human vision is focused for the center. Off to the side what we see is less distinct. Not blurry per se, but less ‘aware’. So focus is about centering something to see into consciousness. Going further, photos have definite boundaries of inside the photo and outside the border. In computing outside is often referred to as the meta part of the presentation. In other words inside the image is a bounded space in which points have the unique qualities of focus in the center of vision. So though Alan is talking about focus across the whole field of the image, the center is ‘known’ by the surround which culturally is the meta data of the surround in computing. Which just refers how computing codes up to putting an image on the display device. So focus is answering a meta data question about the center of vision. Our culture does ‘want’ focus, which means that quality has real value. How to understand? Say one does as Alan says, but as a experiment makes ten out of focus images. Just to see by comparison what people pick without surrounding images with an aesthetic - who ha - to arbitrarily increase blurry values, people seeing these images posted on a wall together will find Alan’s images compelling. But don’t ask what’s the purpose of focus as a value in an image. Focus really has to have meta data to have great value. So for example call one of Alan’s photos an Angel Adams like focused picture tells us how meta data adds value to focus.
Mirrorless cameras have Electronic Viewfinders - the image you see is what the actual picture is going to loo like. This also allows for what is known as Focus Peaking - the electronic viewfinder highlights the areas in focus - making manual focus a lot easier!
Alan is awesome. Super helpful dude. Thanks to everyone!
Loved your in depth play by play.. thank you.. Your attention to detail , loved it!
I love how detailed he teaches.
Your camera-lady did an amazing job of capturing you capture the mushrooms. Thanks for all the detailed info; I’ll be honest 95% of that went over my head but now I know what to search, thanks
Hell yeah always got that bag of rice with me
Interesting commentary from Alan. I agree with the focusing aesthetic on some levels. I see where you show in another video ‘stacking focus’ techniques. And your point about lighting. The focus aesthetic goes back into the 1920s arising with adjustable back large format cameras. One has to ask though what is the point artistically of focus? There is a science argument so to speak for well focused pictures in the sense of ‘knowing’ what is seen. Even that is very variable because there is a wide range of reasons to know what to look at scientifically. So some people use infrared as their departure for images. This artificial color can be striking, but gets away from asking about focus. Another way to ask the question is to observe focus in vision. So human vision is focused for the center. Off to the side what we see is less distinct. Not blurry per se, but less ‘aware’. So focus is about centering something to see into consciousness. Going further, photos have definite boundaries of inside the photo and outside the border. In computing outside is often referred to as the meta part of the presentation. In other words inside the image is a bounded space in which points have the unique qualities of focus in the center of vision. So though Alan is talking about focus across the whole field of the image, the center is ‘known’ by the surround which culturally is the meta data of the surround in computing. Which just refers how computing codes up to putting an image on the display device. So focus is answering a meta data question about the center of vision. Our culture does ‘want’ focus, which means that quality has real value. How to understand? Say one does as Alan says, but as a experiment makes ten out of focus images. Just to see by comparison what people pick without surrounding images with an aesthetic - who ha - to arbitrarily increase blurry values, people seeing these images posted on a wall together will find Alan’s images compelling. But don’t ask what’s the purpose of focus as a value in an image. Focus really has to have meta data to have great value. So for example call one of Alan’s photos an Angel Adams like focused picture tells us how meta data adds value to focus.
great video. I subscribed for future content
Dope video Albert Rockenheimer
What kind of sorcery is that red showing what's in focus!!!
And what kind of LED wand is that?!?
Such a lovely community we are indeed, but i have no idea my friend unfortunately :D
Mirrorless cameras have Electronic Viewfinders - the image you see is what the
actual picture is going to loo like. This also allows for what is known as
Focus Peaking - the electronic viewfinder highlights the areas in focus - making
manual focus a lot easier!
He’s using a DSLR though. Still an EVF just a feature of the camera I’m guessing
Wow, so much useful information 👍👍
What lens is Alan using?
Alan from the clan rockefeller trying to do something for the world.
Eres el mejor Alan :) un saludo
You forgot make sure your GPS is on
Alan is so inspiring. Got to get a real camera
never shoot at max F number. Look up diffraction. It gives you worse IQ. Also, something like iso 800 is perfectly fine to use on that camera. Jeez..