So I have finally ventured into the world of Brenizers and I'd like to know what you think about them before I publish them for the clients (two separate sessions, obviously).

My First Attempt:

During a family session a few weeks ago, I wanted to go for my first ever Brenizer.

K-3, DA* 55, f/2.4, 1/180s, 2x Cactus RF-60 in 64" P. C. Buff PLM Umbrella (moved out of the frame after initial shot of family).

17 shots, here is what the original merge in Photoshop Elements looked like after being stitched:



Final image, with a calculated focal length and aperture of 16mm and f/0.7



My Second Attempt:

I recently shot a wedding and just knew that I wanted to try a Brenizer on this bridge.

K-5 IIs, Sigma 85mm, F/2.0, no off-camera flash

42 images, here is what the original merge in Photoshop Elements looked like after being stitched:



Final image, with a calculated focal length and aperture of 18mm and f/0.4


You are correct - neither lens was shot at its widest aperture as I wanted to balance sharpness and shallow DOF - neither lens is brilliantly sharp wide open but the DOF difference isn't THAT much (imo). I'll have to experiment in the future, however I just wanted to explain my rationale as to why the apertures were deliberately not set to f/1.4 .Also, as you can tell, I still need to practice not leaving any holes between images, as it just makes so much more work to do in PS using the clone tool (which is nothing short of magic, by the way). Anyway, all in good practice.

Regardless, I hope you like these two images

-Heie

[Canada_Rockies]

Fascinating results, Heie. I particularly like the result on the bridge. I am sure the bride and groom are equally impressed.

[LaurenOE]

Brenizers? Be right back to find out what that is.

---------- Post added 07-16-15 at 06:57 PM ----------

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brenizer_Method

[Rondec]

They are both nice, Alex, although I must confess I am not into super narrow depth of field. The bridge shot, with its leading lines, is very well done.

[luftfluss]

The first shot appears to have some irregularities in DOF - there are a couple patches of vegetation that look sharper than neighboring plants. There also appears to be a thing white line originating from the little girl's right foot.

I think the technique works better on the 2nd shot, which is also (BTW, ) a nice location, pose and composition.