[micromacro]

I plan to take pictures of old cemetery monuments in my oncoming trip. The most pictures I checked are taken with wide lenses without background separation. I wonder if it's impossible to use long zoom there, or it's just "tourist" thing to use wide lenses to get all the landscape. I'd like to concentrate on marble work itself instead.

I've never been at that cemetery, just walked around before. So, I'm trying to figure out if 300mm will be so long to separate the background.
Here are some pictures from internet to get an idea. Is it possible to calculate which lens will do the job?

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/oceanside-cemetery-old-san-juan-puerto-rico-31489958.jpg

http://youshouldgotoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Santa-Maria-Magdalena-C...an-Juan-PR.jpg

[bobbotron]

You should check out a DOF calculator. To be honest, 300mm seems way overkill to me, a 50mm or 100mm lens will do well. It depends on how far away you are from your subject, the closer you are, the less depth of field (DOF) you'll have, the longer the focal length, the less DOF you'll also have for a given distance to subject. 300mm will definitely give you a short DOF, but you'll have to be way far away from your subject, and it can be difficult to use hand held.
One helpful calculator Online Depth of Field Calculator

Will you have a tripod?

Perhaps a 50 to 200/300mm zoom would be a good one to bring so you can experiment, or a prime.

For reference, here are two photos taken, one with a 50mm and one with 100mm lens...

This was taken with a 50mm lens, at 2.8, not even that low of an aperture


This was with a 100mm lens at f4

[Na Horuk]

The problem with telephoto in cemeteries is that there is usually not enough space, and no good vantage points. Most cemeteries I visited have things in the way, and no hills from which you can take clear photos downward, of the subject you want. If you can beat this problem, sure, go for 200mm f2.8 if you want. That way you will have nothing but the headstone in focus.
I find the examples that you posted are quite exceptional. Most cemeteries are more cluttered, with some empty spaces, trees, people walking about.. but even those examples do not have much bokeh or background separation (notice that everything is sharp and in-focus, near and far). They might be compressed by telephoto, but they have huge DoF. I think they were taken with normal lens and highly corrected. Its also possible they were stitched with telephoto. Bottom line is, the reason they work well is that they have nice seaside and blue skies behind, and the cemetery is really clean and orderly.

I would instead suggest something like 50mm macro. This will let you do close focus of details, like stone texture, engravings, statues, flowers.. Macro always has bokeh, even at f8, but the aperture will also let you get bokeh photos at regular distances (f2.8 - f4). The FA and DFA 50mm macro are affordable, very sharp, and have decent bokeh.
I would still recommend you bring along a slightly wider lens just in case, though.

[WPRESTO]

We all know how to bokeh the backgound: 1) low ISO; 2) wide aperture; 3) longer FL lens. However, if you are doing headstones it should be a cinch in Photoshop to select the stone(s) you want to show, then invert the selection to the background, click the "blur" filter and apply whatever degree of Gaussian blur pleases, then go to Adjustments and darken, or lighten, or maybe de-saturate to make the stone stand out against the background as desired.

[micromacro]

bobbotron,
Thanks. The calculator does not help much anyway to figure out DOF, I mean to visualize. Your pictures separate the background, but I wanted more. Perhaps the best way is to test different lenses simulating those conditions to visualize what I may get, the distance/size/bokeh.
Most likely I will need photoshop
I try to decide do I need to bring long heavy zoom, or leave it home... Hm.

---------- Post added 10-29-15 at 09:26 AM ----------

I would instead suggest something like 50mm macro.

My primer lens there will be 70mm f2.4 ltd. To "play" around, I also can grab light supertak 50mm f 1.4 (for b&w it's awesome, for color it's too much crazy colors fringing wide open).

That what bugs me: the cemetery is really not bad for using zoom, I see the potential there.
For the best pictures I can take DA*300mm (supposedly arrives tomorrow), but it's heavy beast to include it in trip setup.

I'm also thinking to use for that either M100 f4 macro (it's great for landscape, much better than tamron 90mm macro), or one of my favorite light M 75-150mm f4 (so dimensional!)

[WPRESTO]

Since my previous post I went into Lightroom, searched out a suitable image, sent it to PS, modified the background as described and sent the two images out to the ready-to-post folder. This was a quick process, no alterations to the image of carving and the background treatment may not be to your taste, but with a near-uniform color & tone to the subject of primary interest, this procedure is pretty easy. I've added a third image in which the background was deleted and replaced with a uniform dull-dark green and slightly brightened the statue and lowered the contrast to soften the shadows on her face. BTW, I much prefer the third version. This is often the way I treat statues and especially museum objects that commonly are surrounded by distracting backgrounds.

[micromacro]

it should be a cinch in Photoshop to select the stone(s) you want to show, then invert the selection to the background, click the "blur" filter and apply whatever degree of Gaussian blur pleases, then go to Adjustments and darken, or lighten, or maybe de-saturate to make the stone stand out against the background as desired.

I think is some cases I can apply different background as well (just will take few separate sea and sky shots).
I almost bought Elements 14, but bought travel tripod instead, and decided to get free trial fist to see if it substitutes photoshop. My skills are pretty rusty, but I remember basics.

---------- Post added 10-29-15 at 09:38 AM ----------

Since my previous post I went into Lightroom, searched out a suitable image, sent it to PS, modified the background as described and sent the two images out to the read-to-post folder.

That's promising, thanks! It will make my setup lighter

[bobbotron]

Try this!
Bokeh simulator & depth of field calculator

[micromacro]

Try this!

Cool! Thanks!

[clackers]

We all know how to bokeh the backgound: 1) low ISO; 2) wide aperture; 3) longer FL lens.

I'd replace 1) with 'Get close' and add 4) choose distant background.


This is one I took with a wide lens in a very old cemetery in Malmsbury, central Victoria. In the backlit situation, flash has been used as fill:

[Nick Siebers]

A 50/1.4 should be usable for this. The 70 as well.

[johnmflores]

I'd replace 1) with 'Get close' and add 4) choose distant background.lit situation, flash has been used as fill:

This is often overlooked. Make sure that the distance between the subject and the background is greater than the distance between you and the subject.. The farther away the background, the blurrier it will be.

[stevebrot]

So, I'm trying to figure out if 300mm will be so long to separate the background.

Background isolation using DOF is soft of tricky. As noted above, it is good to know the basics of focal length, distance, and expected DOF, but there is also a certain intangible element. Some lenses have the reputation for "3-D pop" that equates to a decrease in contrast at the limits of DOF. Knowing this, you can increase the isolation by contrast manipulation. This may be done both at exposure time (flash or reflected light) or in post-processing (radial filter in Lightroom, for example).


Steve

[pres589]

Lensrentals.com has a few really good candidates for this available. FA 77mm f1.8 Limited sounds nice, or the FA 43mm f1.9 Limited may work nicely as well. I'm going strictly by focal length and min f-stop and don't know these lenses personally. Myself, I've got an M 50mm f1.4 that would probably work well, or a soft-focusing Kalt 28mm f2.8 that can give some interesting bokeh effects. Lot of options out there.

[zman]

Try this!
Bokeh simulator & depth of field calculator

What an awesome tool. Thanks for posting the link.