Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/08/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Steve wrote regarding: http://www.sonc.com/paw/standrew.htm and http://www.sonc.com/paw/greenville.htm > I have to ask why a 28mm focal length? Would it not be better to use a 90 or > even a 135 pulled back far enough so that you still have the foreground and > the framing with the trees in the alternate. At f8 or 11 there would be plenty of DOF. >>As it is, it seems to me the churches are lost in both pictures. In the alternate you need to look hard to find the >>church steeple which blends into the background trees> sl Both shots were cropped from these shots for the brochure. The wheat field shot played as a square with the church on the left truck. The Greenville shot played veritcal, with much of the left, right and top and bottom cropped. Here is how it looks in the brochure: http://www.sonc.com/brochure2.jpg Most of the other eleven shots are close front shots of the buildings. I was seeking to show the rural character of the churches. There are 33 churches in the directory. We could only use shots of thirteen to represent them, as we had some historic photos to place too. Further, in the 1950's many of these churches buildings were donated by a local funeral director (great P.R. idea) and built all from the same plans, so it is hard to tell them apart from a simple front view. As far as focal length on these two shots . . . there is no shot of the Greenville Church tighter than a 50mm I did shoot it with the Jupiter 50 , but chose this one. No place to stand because of the rough terrain and swamp. The other was shot with several focal lengths, but again I wanted the rural character to show, and the grasses and the church to be in focus was part of my plan, so the 28mm "amber waves of grain" version won out. Thanks for your comments, Steve Regards, SonC http://www.sonc.com >