This comment has nothing to do with video, but is something I'd like to say directly to you Sean. I've followed you for years. I've travelled your path from the early days and right up to now. I'd like to say that you are one of the most rounded, creative and insightful photographer's in this crazy world of YT. I could listen to you for hours (in fact I have!). As a fellow introvert, I get how you are so reflective on what you do, why you do it and how you do it. Your introspection regarding historical photographers and the images they take is unparalleled. I was also struck by your brutal honesty regarding your marriage. Not really knowing you, I did feel a real sense of genuine sadness for you as that must have been a very difficult video to make; yet your thoughts were towards your wife. I hope people did as you asked and didn't send negative comments to her. You are an amazingly talented photographer and you have helped me in so many ways so thank you for your honesty, passion and willingness to share your knowledge. You really are one of the world's good guys.
I shot a magazine cover with this technique about 12 years ago. I knew Ryan Brenizer through the Flickr community and he taught us how to do it. I love making images this way. Thanks for the refresher.
I'm not smart enough to know if this will work, but dumb enough to know I'm going to give it a try. Love this video, Sean. Thanks for sharing an interesting idea to go try.
make sure to overlap and shoot more frames than you need. also note- - if you are doing a vertical landscape you can take a stop off the exposure for the imaeges near the top of the image... a 50mm lens at f1.4 on a full frame camera works great for this technique. Make sure to turn the camera around the center of the lens and not move it very far esp if you have anything closer than sy 15 feet in the picture....
If you stich three FF images taken with 50/1.4 lens to match the MF 0.8x crop, you'll end up with an image that you would get with 40/1.12 lens. You can buy 40/1.2 lens that will give pretty much identical look and not spend all that efforts on stitching images. Even better, get pretty affordable and very good quality Sigma 35mm f/1.2 for more impressive results.
@USGrant Sure... one "can buy" a Voigtländer Nokton 40/1.2 for 1500$... What a needless point to make. We should all be on Phase Ones by now, of course. It is not the idea here !!! The idea is to get the most out of your standard gear and thus become more flexible and creative. Spending big money on photo gear has only produced rich companies - not rich photography whatsoever... Look around!! Where are the 4000 Dollar shots?? Show 'em!
@@myk-vg9qi you still didn't get it. There is absolutely nothing special in medium format or any other format, all of them are the same with equivalent lenses.
Great Video. Maybe one thing to add: There is nothing like THE 'medium format'. The GFX has a rather small sensor with 43.8mm x 32.9 mm compared to other medium format cameras like a Hasselblad H6D with 53.4mm x 40mm (and then 645 medium format is 60mm x 45mm). So in order to get the medium format look of the Hasselblad you would have to stack 3 GFX images or 6 full frame images.
Thanks for the tutorial. I like how you don't have silly gimmicks and sounds and cartoons in your videos. Just adults to adults without having to be entertained every few seconds. Keep up the good work.
Sean is one of the few YT creators that can make you watch a video about something you've already known for a decade, and still be entertained and enjoy every bit of it :) Kudos, sir!
Been a while since I've seen the Brenizer method mentioned. I decided long ago that I'm not dedicated enough to this look to make the effort worth it. Very nice explanation though! I like the perspective regarding storytelling you added at the end
Great tutorial! I have a 35mm f0.95 lens for my APSC camera and I can use this technique to get a wide angle shot. Just a minor correction at 4:35 the background blur you will get will be similar to a 40mm f1.2*0.8 = f0.96 lens. I.e. You can put a 40mm f0.96 lens on a full frame to get the same amount of blur! You have to multiply the f stop to calculate equivalent background blur. Although the light gathering will stay at f1.2
@Gman1044 IDK man maybe the term I'm using is incorrect. What I was referring to is the amount of blur you will get if the subject is standing the same distance away and the equivalent focal length is same, The radius of the blur will be different! Otherwise my phone also has a f1.7 main camera (24mm equivalent) but it is not even close to the amount of blur a full frame 24mm f1.8 lens could create
Once again Sean, you've made the technical, simple, the creative, accessible, and won us over to once again to 'ante up' and say "maybe we can". Thankyou! Bravo 🎯 -Greg
I love this tenchique. It was really popular in the 2000s, esepcially with wedding photographers, as you mention. I called it a DoF montage but the aim was essentially to get that MF look. I'm not a great photographer by any means but it was a lot of fun finding subjects and creating this look.
I’ve been doing this on accident for years because I could only afford the nifty fifty canon lens so for wider landscapes like waterfalls I take stacked panoramas and put them together. Nice to finally have a name to use for it!
Oh wow. I've done a degree in photography and working as a professional photographer on my 13th year now - and this technique was completely new to me. I couldn't make sense of the theory until you demonstrated it so beautifully. I even used to own a Pentax 6x7. Thank you so much! Looking forward to testing this out!
Thai was so, fascinating! I thoroughly enjoyed your video as I usually do, including the ones were you speak about fellow photographer who you show case in which you profile their lives and contributions to photography. Great Job! Thank you and God Bless. Roger
I' consider myself a pretty nerdy, technical type photographer and this has never crossed my mind. I think this sort of an idea comes from an experienced photographer being curious about why things are how they are and it's much appreciated as it gets my brain turning a little.
In order to stitch perfectly the different shots, you can use a nodal slide on your tripod. After finding the nodal point for your lens, photoshop will be able to merge the shots perfectly without artifacts or inconsistencies
Only one problem, finding the nodal point on all lenses you have.. Sure it's easy when you're working with double digit focal lengths (simple 35mm to 85mm lenses). Once you start breaching 135mm+ so things like 200mm for instance and up - all the videos online trying to teach you how to find the nodal point become utterly useless, since the nodal point SOMEHOW (at least in my experience, and I'm sure an optician can easily explain how this is possible), the nodal point is actually behind the camera body itself.
Been on a 50R with the Fuji 50mm 3.5 🧁, Pentax 75mm 2.8 and 150mm 3.5. It blows my mind… medium format digital kit for under $2000… of course, the Pentax glass was my dad’s.
That’s so nice that you’ve done this educational video I never knew this and your content really sticks out against most of the other just self promoting videos on RUclips ❤
Hi Sean, using equivalence, you can bring the results closer together. The GFX has a 0.79 crop factor meaning you can achieve a similar look with a 40mm full frame lens. The DoF will still be a bit deeper. Great vid.
I just purchased the Vol 4 of Parable, I want to say thank you for your great contribution to photographers like me, you give great advise and inspiration. I am from the beautiful island of Puerto Rico. I hope this message encourages you to keep providing great video content. Congratulations
Great description of this technique, Sean, and lovely image results! I wonder if you used an 80mm or 85mm on the full frame camera, you might end up with comparable compression between the two. Essentially, you'd be reversing the Full Frame to Medium Format calculation--If my math is right the 65mm MF lens would be equivalent to 81.25 on FF. Maybe you'd need to also adjust your position so that the frame matches top to bottom between the MF camera in landscape and the FF camera in portrait, or maybe the same position would work out perfectly. I know that equivalent focal lengths get tricky when you introduce the concept of angle of view. I've always been curious but I'd have to rent a bunch of gear to test!
Thank you for sharing your experience and making the video. I have been doing these kinds of images for quite a long time (not just for portraits) and there are more things to consider when trying this method if someone wants to output a more serious project (and not just a few personal images/experiments). The quality of the lens dictates significantly how well the final bokehrama will look like. What affects the image quality in a very considerable way is the lens's ability to project a flat field of focus because any distortion of the field of focus will show up in the final image as a very noticeable and distracting aberrations. The wider and faster the lens is the more chance it will have a less flat field of focus where the outer edges of the frames will bow their focus either towards the photographer or away from the photographer, this will render the foreground and/or background elements to distort in a direction and when you move to the next frame the direction of distortion can/will change and in the stitching process there will be a sudden change of how those two elements blend. For example you can have grass or leaves shift from left to right and when the final image is blended together the grass will look like it's going in 2 different directions. This is why telephoto primes and macro lenses have a better chance of giving a more uniform look to the image than a 50mm lens. If you look in your own example the Sony 50mm f 1.2 background of the bokehrama has a business with the foliage and the trees behind your model. Another issue is the way lenses may render the bokeh of the background or the foreground, if a lens tends to render more swirly backgrounds with noticeable effect towards the edges like lemon shaped bokeh balls when you move to the next frame of the bokehrama the same area will have smoother bokeh because you are closer to the centre of the image, but when you blend the images together you have 2 different swirly areas that will overlap and some software can struggle to blend them together smoothly and will give you a background where the swirls counter each other and make the final result look very distorted. Slower lenses like f 2.8 and macro lenses have smoother bokeh and more neutral bokeh balls which makes them more suitable for these kinds of images but will require to either get closer to the subject and add more images around the subject to get a similar effect to a f 1.8 or f 1.4 lens. This is why getting the better result of such a method can be a bit more difficult if you want to take the IQ and the final result more serious. There is a way to lessen the impact of resolution on the process of making the bokehramas and the final output IF your camera supports smaller format RAW files, some Canon and Sony cameras will let you chose a smaller size RAW file while still maintaining the IQ of a FF sensor. Another thing that one would need to consider when using the Brenizer Method is Parallax because the closer you are the the subject the more the background elements will shift their position between each image which can make stitching more difficult and the result less realistic, a longer focal length will affect this as well where a 200mm lens can be quite punishing with parallax issues while a wider lens like 50mm is more forgiving but has other issues that I have mentioned above. A good compromise is actually a 75 to 120mm lens. Also the more you add to the bokehrama the stronger the effect of Medium-Format look but the more difficult it is to maintain a good alignment between each shot and a good enough overlap between each image (at least 33%) to make all the images count successfully by the software being able to align them successfully. Using a longer focal length adds to this difficulty considerably and increases the risk of a failed stitch which you will not know until you are done with your shoot and you are in the processing stage. Keep in mind that not all the resolution of each shot will count toward the final result because of the overlap between each image and the outer edges that need to be cropped when the alignment is not 100% perfect (and it will never be 100% perfect), so if you have a 6 shot bokehrama of 40 MP you will not get a straight up 240 MP final result and it will more likely be a 150 to 200 MP images. Always shoot more shots then you need in the bokehrama because you will need space to crop and it's better to have more data to work with that you can cut if you don't want it or need it than failing an entire stitch just because one shot did not work out because if one corner out of a 6 shot square for example fails then you have the entire side of that square unable to work unless you are willing to put in the time to heavily Photoshop in the missing data either using Cloning Tools or Content Aware Fill or the (easier option but still not fail-proof) AI Generative Fill. And never count on just one attempt to be successful, if the image is important always do a 2nd and\or a 3rd attempt to increase your chance of a successful bokehrama because you will have to go back and set up another shot if it did not work. Given all the risks I have mentioned so far, it would be more than prudent to not leave it down to luck no matter the skill level. Your subject must be perfectly still for at least the initial shot or initial overlap because any movement can risk failure of the entire process BUT after you get the initial overall your subject doesn't even have to be there as you add more context to the bokehrama with each image you make ... UNLESS their shadow is part of the image, then they need to continue to stay still. Depending on the orientation of how you want to shoot the bokehrama (horizontal, vertical or square) it can be helpful to think about what orientation you want of your camera and each shot because it is easier to overall in horizontal orientation with 33-50% overlap between each image than trying to overlap a vertical shot, especially at the 3:2 aspect ratio. Also, the orientation of the camera can have an impact on how the background is rendered if the lens has a stronger personality of how it renders the bokeh and the background (swirly and lemon-shaped bokeh balls) because these effects can be stronger in horizontal orientation at the edges then vertical orientation. Between each attempt shoot an image with your hand or the lens cap over the lens to have a dark image to signify that you have finished a sequence of one attempt, it will help you when dealing with the images in post because you will have a distinction between each attempt instead of having to guess or remember when you start one attempt and finished it, especially if you have many attempts (to increase your chances) and you start them the same way with the same orientation and the same overlap. Sensor size will dictate how strong of an effect you can get because there is a limit of DoF you can get for each format (unless you look for unconventional lenses like f 0.95 primes). On Medium format you have f 1.4 as the fastest lens, f 1.2 is the fastest for FF (with autofocus), f 1.2 on ASP-C but that is equivalent of f 1.8 on FF, and f 1.2 on Micro Four Thirds with the equivalent of f 2.4 of FF. The stronger the effect you want on smaller formats the faster the lens you need AND the longer the Focal Length to compensate for less DoF of the smaller sensor (wider lens). (Please don't tell me about "The Truth about Equivalency" as I already know all the information about it, I'm just simplifying it here). A FF setup can achieve a Medium Format easily and even get stronger effect. A APS-C setup CAN achieve Medium Format but will need more shots and either get closer or use longer focal length (about double of what you would need with FF) but you will not be able to get a stronger effect. A Micro Four Thirds CAN achieve Medium Format with VERY long focal length (200-300mm equivalent) AND with very fast lens (f 1.2, f 1.4 or f 1.8 at telephoto focal length) but it is very difficult and the success rate will be less reliable if you use 35-85mm equivalent focal length lenses then most you can get is a FF look or even ASP-C. I hope this helps anyone\someone.
Will definitely give this a go Sean! Thanks for explaining and showing the method so nicely. The resolution benefits are a great bonus! One thing I noticed was the need to hold your focus-hold button. If the Sony has back button focusing this would remove the focus from the shutter button. I use this all the time with my D850 and find it exhilarating to be able to focus once and then shoot quickly without worrying about a focus shift. Thanks again Sean!
Hi Sean Thank you so much again for this great presentation. Love how the pictures ended up. It gives a beginner like me a tool to get medium format look!! without spending to much money. Brilliant I noted the histogram being more to the left. Would the same picture be 'boring' if the histogram would be more centered. Or the opposite preserving highlights. when would you choose one for the other. thank you
Ooh! I never thought about doing this with my camera! I have stitched together landscape images, but never thought about doing it with a live subject! I might give it a whirl this evening (If I can get my dog to sit still for long enough!)
I recently bought the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 for Sony and it definitely gives you that medium format look with the combination of being a relatively wide focal length with a shallow depth of field - great for environmental portraits!
One of the advantages of this technique is getting effectively impossible aperture values. 40/1.2 is great, but what about a 10/0.3? You could use your 40/1.2, use this bokehrama technique, and get an image that would be the equivalent of a 10mm lens, set to the impossible f/0.3.
This is so cool. I've done this before with landscapes to create big, sweeping images, but doing the same thing with portraits is so smart. Such an obvious idea that I never would have thought of. Thanks for the video!
Nicely done. Great presentation. I like how you explained the process with a drawing, then showed the field work and best of all showing the actual results. Great stuff!
Hello Sean, great video as always! I've been experimenting with this stitching technique as a solution to a problem - making large format documentary landscapes that can be printed in big sizes (2m, 3m length). During my research I've come across a couple of things. If you want to use this process regularly and accurately every time, you're best to use a panoramic tripod head. What it does is keep the lens' nodal point in the same place and only moves the back of the camera, so you don't get any parallax effect and the images can be stitched together way more easily. The second thing is using a specialized stitching software, I use PTGui, it lets you adjust all aspects of your panorama if some points happen to not align properly. I'm not sponsored by PTGui, but i genuinely recommend checking out their video guide series if you want to learn more about panoramas. It really isn't easy to master, but I hope that if I do, it'll be rewarding. From what I know, Andreas Gursky also uses image stitching when creating his gigantic photographs.
Love this technique! Did not know its name. Thanks. Extremely versatile and usefull. For me, stiching is the only real advantage of digital. And like with wide lenses in general, this method is playing out its magic when counterbalanceing the wide by moving in on your subjct. "Zoom out but step in". Classic 30-20mm lens movie look. Magic! I discovered this when limiting myself to a 50mm while fighting it for being slightly too long oftentimes. Since I tend to shoot wider (40-30) and like to shoot rather open anyway, I quickly realised the different look on top of the convenience of capturing wide shots with a 50 in the first place. Especially milky way shots or panos up to 25k pixels in width (@300 print dpi...). All perfect with a 200£ lens. In fact, I still take a stich-series regardless, even portraits, and would definitely use this method over a kit zoom anytime. Three flies with one lens... A 50mm/1.4/1.8 is "all" you really need. It can look like a 35 as well as a 70.. Most important and versatile lense of all. So many times I skipped the 24-70 for a 50. Job done... and cheap to replace when they break, but they dont... I'd even go as far as saying: if one can not capture a shot with a 50 one will not capture it at all.
My go to for breaking out of a rut, or just because I love the look, is to change my camera’s settings to monochrome and 1:1. I’m using either a Nikon Z6III or Z8 with an 85mm 1.8. This video gives me a lot to think about. Thank you, now following and looking forward to future posts.
People often talk about the "quality" of medium format, but I've never heard it defined so clearly. The visual explanation of how depth of field is affected based on focal length vs sensor size was super helpful as was the demo with the different cameras. I've often stitched photos to get a wider field of view when I was lacking a wide lens or bc I wanted a more detailed image, but that's always been for landscape and architecture. I'll definitely be giving this technique a try. As always, thanks for another fantastic video.
There's also the inherent quality to larger sensors picking up more photons overall for the image, and so less noise, higher resolution, more bits of color information as a whole. That being said, most don't need that.
Depth of field has nothing to do with focal length and sensor size, and everything to do with the aperture size and focus distance. What a larger sensor allows you do do is get a wider field of view. What a larger sensor does allow, is for you to get a wider field of view at the same focal length. Which can allow you to get closer to your subject, to fill the frame. Getting closer then meaning shallower depth of field.
I was anticipating a mention of the Brenizer method, been using it for many years but often falling into the trap of taking too many images as you highlighted at 8:00. The simplicity of the technique you introduced here is very helpful 👍
Excellent video, thanks Sean. I had tried this years ago on a tree with a 50mm lens on a 5D mk 2, result was great. It's interesting to see it work on a human being to great effect, the assembling works well.
I appreciate the run-through. I've heard of the technique before and a very brief how-to (just put some images together!), but I didn't know exactly how to do so. I might have to try this!
Thank you so much for this video. Coming from film photography, I love the medium format look and this is something that I always wanted to achieve with digital. The prices for medium format cameras are way out of my range, so I can't wait to try this method.
Thx, i have made too big stich but the 3 photos is a good idea. I like these kind of projects. I once had a tilt/shift lens before i sold it. But i made 3 shift photos with that and they were easy to stich together.
I used this technique to get a wide-angle shot with a MF folding film camera, having a fixed 75 mm lens (stitched together 4 square frames). Works for all sorts of photographic venues.
Great video! My son and I did some of these kind of portraits several years ago. I wish I had your advice about keeping it simple though, I had many shots and huge files. One benefit of that is that I was able to crop the photo and get a few different versions of the same composition. I called them panorama portraits because I used the panorama function on Affinity Photo to get the results. Also because I couldn't remember the name Brenizer (?) Effect lol.
Like always I love your videos :) I would have something to add. When doing the calculation for a crop, you apply that magnification also to the aperture, not only the focal length. So a 65mm 1.4 on that Fuji with a 0.8 crop, would be equivalent to a 52mm f1.12, So with a 50mm 1.2 you were already close. And you can always use a wider aperture lens on full frame, like a Voigtlander 50mm f1.0 or a Laowa Argus 35mm f0.95, that would give you a very similar look to a medium format.
I am definitely going to experiment with this. My Pentax K-50 APSC camera and 50mm f1.4 are a perfect combination to try it out too, thanks for the tutorial. This kind of knowledge is precious, so thank you for passing it on!
Excellent video Sean. I really love the way you present material in a way viewers of all skills can appreciate and learn from. I am very fortunate to be able to say that the camera I “already have” is a GFX so maybe I can get the large format look (8x10?) by using this technique!? 😊
Thank you Sean, as usual. It is so well done. And I always learn a lot from you. If one uses back button focus, wouldn't it then de- necessitate the focus hold? Thank you very much
Thank you, I used to do 360 panorama's. Now I am inspired to do medium format pictures. It will be more about a beautifull image then a technical gimmick
Hello Sean and thank you for yet another great video. I may be the silly guy in the comment section by asking this, but here it goes regardless: If the "medium format look" is wide focal length with shallow depth of field, would I achieve this look with an ultrabright manual lens. For example, the 7 Artisans 35mm for my fuji XE-4 (F.F equivalent 50mm) has an aperture of 0.95. Other than the lesser resolution, what else would be the difference to the stitching method? Thank you again!
Really well explained, thank you. Without perhaps meaning to, you also remind me why shifting from APS-C to FF was such a big game changer for me years ago, bringing me back to DoF options like I had when using my beloved Pentax MX before the digital age. I only ise LR Mobile at the moment but it seems Apple photos for desktop also do panoramic photo stitching.
Thanks for this video, which is a shocking eye opener to myself. For some strange reason, combined panos always had a strong appeal to me. Separately from that, I was thinking to go medium format. Now I know for sure I'm a medium format person, as along the way I learned about all the limitations from light change from clouds, movements from wind and subjects moving just slightly, when doing the pano arrangements.
If I’m not mistaken, the Leica Deluxe type 109 is a small camera that you can switch the aspect ration on and you can get that medium format look. It’s only around $1400 new.
Fascinating. I think if I liked medium format I would have to go ahead and buy it (used if necessary). It's a lot more planning and work to do it with a smaller sensor. But for an occasional shot, this method is great.
I use this method to obtain high megapixel landscape images with a m4t camera, which I print successfully to 1200 mm wide prints. I’m too old to carry heavier cameras on multi day hikes. But I do miss the days of Hasselblad 500 CM and SinarP 4x5 sheet film cameras.
A problem with this technique is that the sensor will be angled slightly between the shots. A better technique, maybe, is to use a tilt shift lens (at least with full frame). That way you can make the image wider without moving the sensor.
Amazing video. I recently upgraded from an APS-C to a full-frame camera and I'am slowly beginning to realize the substantial boost in picture quality & background separation. I also know that a few years down the line, I'll definitely succumb to the temptations of a medium format. But until then, it'll be great to be able to achieve that look, especially with the environmental portraits as you rightly mentioned. I had heard of the Brenzier method before but always thought it to be too much of a hassle as opposed to just buying a 24mm or 35mm f/1.8. But the composite images that you showed had a far more interesting look than those from the wide-angle lenses. And with Lightroom, it seems easier than ever to replicate. Thanks for the tips.
Great video, great presentation, your videos are allways a pleasure to whatch. I´ve used the stitching technique often, when the wide angle lens was not wide enough. But now I´ll try it out for that specific look.
Thank you for this video. I love medium format but can't afford it. Good to know I can mimick it. As always a very clear video. Thank you for that! I have a queston though. How do you get her skin to look so natural? I avoid green environments as much as possible, because for me it is often very hard to get rid of the green color cast. I work with mid grey cards mostly. But that doesn't seem to be enough sometimes.
@@thejerrycliff 😂Ryan brenizer would be pissed that I messed up his name! I would annoy the hell out of that dude when I was first starting out! I desperately wanted to know his secrets on this technique.
Great tutorial, Sean. I shot LF and MF on film for many years, and never really tried to approximate similar image qualities on 35mm full frame or APSC. I'll start experimenting now. Thanks for the insights.
the "use what you already have in your camera bag" advice got me thinking.. I have a Canon R5 with a speedbooster... most lenses shoot an image circle larger than what's needed.. I'm sure I can just put some EF lenses on the speedbooster and shoot wider, with the same shallow depth of field and try to get close to the medium format effect.
Nice trick! I often miss the look of medium format (film) and have never been quite satisfied with similar photos with my digital cameras. FYI, a video tripod head would work great for this technique as you can lock vertical or horizontal panning on it, something I do to make to make large panoramic landscapes... never thought of using it for portraits
I am a massive fan of the channel and your work, Sean. Thanks again for another great piece of content. I have tried the Branzier method years back but I don't think it is worth the hassle. A major problem are stitching artifacts due to small changes in the environment between shots. Since I moved back mostly to analog photography anyway, I now prefer 'real' medium format. I say real, since modern digital medium format does not come even close in terms of sensor/film plan size of even the smallest 120 film medium format (645): e.g. Fuji GFX 43.8x32.9mm sensor vs. 60x45mm. Let alone when comparing the digital with larger mf (6x6, 6x7 or even 6x9). Photography Online had this discussion in their June 24 podcast and it is recommended to keep in mind that digital medium format is not really medium format. The real deal can be had for a few hundred dollar/euros/pounds if you really want that look: I shoot with a Bronica ETRS (645) and an old Zeiss Ikon folder camera (6x6) and they both yield great results. Keep up the good work and cheers everyone.
I use a 50mm f/1.2 in my daily walks, and tile several shots when I need a wider composition. Tools like Lightroom make the stitching so much easier :)
Excellent presentation of an excellent idea. FWIW, I've had a revelation since shooting people with my Fuji 6x9 film camera. Basically, the 100mm f/2.8 lens gives me the same perspective and depth of field on the same area of the negative that such a lens always gave me on 35mm. It's just surrounded by the environmental elements of a 43mm equivalent or so.
You’re one of the kindest, most thoughtful educators I’ve encountered on RUclips. Thank you for sharing this with us.
That's very kind. Thank you Paul.
I fully Agree. Sean's view on the art of photography as a personal journey is something you can't find elsewhere.
Agree, amazing human being!!!!!
Agreed, always fantastic educational, intelligent, carefully-prepared and thoroughly engaging - thank you Sean
I only can underline that! ❣
This comment has nothing to do with video, but is something I'd like to say directly to you Sean.
I've followed you for years. I've travelled your path from the early days and right up to now. I'd like to say that you are one of the most rounded, creative and insightful photographer's in this crazy world of YT. I could listen to you for hours (in fact I have!). As a fellow introvert, I get how you are so reflective on what you do, why you do it and how you do it. Your introspection regarding historical photographers and the images they take is unparalleled. I was also struck by your brutal honesty regarding your marriage. Not really knowing you, I did feel a real sense of genuine sadness for you as that must have been a very difficult video to make; yet your thoughts were towards your wife. I hope people did as you asked and didn't send negative comments to her. You are an amazingly talented photographer and you have helped me in so many ways so thank you for your honesty, passion and willingness to share your knowledge. You really are one of the world's good guys.
I really appreciate the kind words Thomas. Thank you for taking the time. You've made my day.
❤
You're one of the last of the dying breed of youtubers not talking about gear all the time. Well executed, I've learnt something new, thanks
I shot a magazine cover with this technique about 12 years ago. I knew Ryan Brenizer through the Flickr community and he taught us how to do it. I love making images this way. Thanks for the refresher.
I'm not smart enough to know if this will work, but dumb enough to know I'm going to give it a try. Love this video, Sean. Thanks for sharing an interesting idea to go try.
make sure to overlap and shoot more frames than you need. also note- - if you are doing a vertical landscape you can take a stop off the exposure for the imaeges near the top of the image... a 50mm lens at f1.4 on a full frame camera works great for this technique. Make sure to turn the camera around the center of the lens and not move it very far esp if you have anything closer than sy 15 feet in the picture....
Definitely works. Research the Brenizer technique. You can create a “lens” that can’t truly exist.
If you stich three FF images taken with 50/1.4 lens to match the MF 0.8x crop, you'll end up with an image that you would get with 40/1.12 lens. You can buy 40/1.2 lens that will give pretty much identical look and not spend all that efforts on stitching images. Even better, get pretty affordable and very good quality Sigma 35mm f/1.2 for more impressive results.
@USGrant
Sure... one "can buy" a Voigtländer Nokton 40/1.2 for 1500$...
What a needless point to make. We should all be on Phase Ones by now, of course.
It is not the idea here !!!
The idea is to get the most out of your standard gear and thus become more flexible and creative.
Spending big money on photo gear has only produced rich companies - not rich photography whatsoever... Look around!! Where are the 4000 Dollar shots?? Show 'em!
@@myk-vg9qi you still didn't get it. There is absolutely nothing special in medium format or any other format, all of them are the same with equivalent lenses.
Great Video. Maybe one thing to add: There is nothing like THE 'medium format'. The GFX has a rather small sensor with 43.8mm x 32.9 mm compared to other medium format cameras like a Hasselblad H6D with 53.4mm x 40mm (and then 645 medium format is 60mm x 45mm). So in order to get the medium format look of the Hasselblad you would have to stack 3 GFX images or 6 full frame images.
I heard the term "Brenizer effect" but I wasn't aware that it's so easy to do. At least on full frame. So thanks.
Thanks for the tutorial. I like how you don't have silly gimmicks and sounds and cartoons in your videos. Just adults to adults without having to be entertained every few seconds. Keep up the good work.
Back button focus helps with simplifying the technique a bit by eliminating the need to manually switch the AF on/off button.
I also remember doing this like 12 years ago! Thanks for the reminder of this technique.
Sean is one of the few YT creators that can make you watch a video about something you've already known for a decade, and still be entertained and enjoy every bit of it :) Kudos, sir!
Been a while since I've seen the Brenizer method mentioned. I decided long ago that I'm not dedicated enough to this look to make the effort worth it. Very nice explanation though! I like the perspective regarding storytelling you added at the end
Nobody remembers after those years, that Brenizer stole this idea from a Fred Miranda Forum
Great tutorial! I have a 35mm f0.95 lens for my APSC camera and I can use this technique to get a wide angle shot. Just a minor correction at 4:35 the background blur you will get will be similar to a 40mm f1.2*0.8 = f0.96 lens. I.e. You can put a 40mm f0.96 lens on a full frame to get the same amount of blur! You have to multiply the f stop to calculate equivalent background blur. Although the light gathering will stay at f1.2
DOF is identical at any given f stop whether its 5x4 or APSC ETC.
@Gman1044 IDK man maybe the term I'm using is incorrect. What I was referring to is the amount of blur you will get if the subject is standing the same distance away and the equivalent focal length is same, The radius of the blur will be different! Otherwise my phone also has a f1.7 main camera (24mm equivalent) but it is not even close to the amount of blur a full frame 24mm f1.8 lens could create
Once again Sean, you've made the technical, simple, the creative, accessible, and won us over to once again to 'ante up' and say "maybe we can". Thankyou!
Bravo 🎯
-Greg
I love this tenchique. It was really popular in the 2000s, esepcially with wedding photographers, as you mention. I called it a DoF montage but the aim was essentially to get that MF look. I'm not a great photographer by any means but it was a lot of fun finding subjects and creating this look.
Thank you so much for showing us this technique, Sean. Now I'm going to try it with a medium format sensor. Gotta get that large format look 😜
I’ve been doing this on accident for years because I could only afford the nifty fifty canon lens so for wider landscapes like waterfalls I take stacked panoramas and put them together. Nice to finally have a name to use for it!
Oh wow. I've done a degree in photography and working as a professional photographer on my 13th year now - and this technique was completely new to me. I couldn't make sense of the theory until you demonstrated it so beautifully. I even used to own a Pentax 6x7. Thank you so much! Looking forward to testing this out!
Thai was so, fascinating! I thoroughly enjoyed your video as I usually do, including the ones were you speak about fellow photographer who you show case in which you profile their lives and contributions to photography. Great Job! Thank you and God Bless. Roger
I' consider myself a pretty nerdy, technical type photographer and this has never crossed my mind. I think this sort of an idea comes from an experienced photographer being curious about why things are how they are and it's much appreciated as it gets my brain turning a little.
hi, your of the few on you tube that i would consider a educator, blessing
In order to stitch perfectly the different shots, you can use a nodal slide on your tripod. After finding the nodal point for your lens, photoshop will be able to merge the shots perfectly without artifacts or inconsistencies
for portrait as long as you keep the subject at the center of one of the stitched images the parallax you get by not using a nodal is not a big issue
Only one problem, finding the nodal point on all lenses you have.. Sure it's easy when you're working with double digit focal lengths (simple 35mm to 85mm lenses). Once you start breaching 135mm+ so things like 200mm for instance and up - all the videos online trying to teach you how to find the nodal point become utterly useless, since the nodal point SOMEHOW (at least in my experience, and I'm sure an optician can easily explain how this is possible), the nodal point is actually behind the camera body itself.
Love this method. Used it a few times with my wife and daughter. You've just reminded me to keep it front and centre in my toolkit 😊
Your content is so informative and captivating that I find myself lingering here for longer.
Been on a 50R with the Fuji 50mm 3.5 🧁, Pentax 75mm 2.8 and 150mm 3.5.
It blows my mind… medium format digital kit for under $2000… of course, the Pentax glass was my dad’s.
That’s so nice that you’ve done this educational video I never knew this and your content really sticks out against most of the other just self promoting videos on RUclips ❤
Hi Sean, using equivalence, you can bring the results closer together. The GFX has a 0.79 crop factor meaning you can achieve a similar look with a 40mm full frame lens. The DoF will still be a bit deeper. Great vid.
I just purchased the Vol 4 of Parable, I want to say thank you for your great contribution to photographers like me, you give great advise and inspiration. I am from the beautiful island of Puerto Rico. I hope this message encourages you to keep providing great video content. Congratulations
Great description of this technique, Sean, and lovely image results! I wonder if you used an 80mm or 85mm on the full frame camera, you might end up with comparable compression between the two. Essentially, you'd be reversing the Full Frame to Medium Format calculation--If my math is right the 65mm MF lens would be equivalent to 81.25 on FF. Maybe you'd need to also adjust your position so that the frame matches top to bottom between the MF camera in landscape and the FF camera in portrait, or maybe the same position would work out perfectly. I know that equivalent focal lengths get tricky when you introduce the concept of angle of view. I've always been curious but I'd have to rent a bunch of gear to test!
This is so brilliant, thank you! I make landscapes (near and far), but this technique can clearly apply. My mind is truly blown, cheers!
This is pure magic. Thank you SO MUCH to taking the time to explain the thought process behind this magic trick.
Thank you for sharing your experience and making the video. I have been doing these kinds of images for quite a long time (not just for portraits) and there are more things to consider when trying this method if someone wants to output a more serious project (and not just a few personal images/experiments). The quality of the lens dictates significantly how well the final bokehrama will look like. What affects the image quality in a very considerable way is the lens's ability to project a flat field of focus because any distortion of the field of focus will show up in the final image as a very noticeable and distracting aberrations. The wider and faster the lens is the more chance it will have a less flat field of focus where the outer edges of the frames will bow their focus either towards the photographer or away from the photographer, this will render the foreground and/or background elements to distort in a direction and when you move to the next frame the direction of distortion can/will change and in the stitching process there will be a sudden change of how those two elements blend. For example you can have grass or leaves shift from left to right and when the final image is blended together the grass will look like it's going in 2 different directions. This is why telephoto primes and macro lenses have a better chance of giving a more uniform look to the image than a 50mm lens. If you look in your own example the Sony 50mm f 1.2 background of the bokehrama has a business with the foliage and the trees behind your model. Another issue is the way lenses may render the bokeh of the background or the foreground, if a lens tends to render more swirly backgrounds with noticeable effect towards the edges like lemon shaped bokeh balls when you move to the next frame of the bokehrama the same area will have smoother bokeh because you are closer to the centre of the image, but when you blend the images together you have 2 different swirly areas that will overlap and some software can struggle to blend them together smoothly and will give you a background where the swirls counter each other and make the final result look very distorted. Slower lenses like f 2.8 and macro lenses have smoother bokeh and more neutral bokeh balls which makes them more suitable for these kinds of images but will require to either get closer to the subject and add more images around the subject to get a similar effect to a f 1.8 or f 1.4 lens. This is why getting the better result of such a method can be a bit more difficult if you want to take the IQ and the final result more serious.
There is a way to lessen the impact of resolution on the process of making the bokehramas and the final output IF your camera supports smaller format RAW files, some Canon and Sony cameras will let you chose a smaller size RAW file while still maintaining the IQ of a FF sensor.
Another thing that one would need to consider when using the Brenizer Method is Parallax because the closer you are the the subject the more the background elements will shift their position between each image which can make stitching more difficult and the result less realistic, a longer focal length will affect this as well where a 200mm lens can be quite punishing with parallax issues while a wider lens like 50mm is more forgiving but has other issues that I have mentioned above. A good compromise is actually a 75 to 120mm lens. Also the more you add to the bokehrama the stronger the effect of Medium-Format look but the more difficult it is to maintain a good alignment between each shot and a good enough overlap between each image (at least 33%) to make all the images count successfully by the software being able to align them successfully. Using a longer focal length adds to this difficulty considerably and increases the risk of a failed stitch which you will not know until you are done with your shoot and you are in the processing stage.
Keep in mind that not all the resolution of each shot will count toward the final result because of the overlap between each image and the outer edges that need to be cropped when the alignment is not 100% perfect (and it will never be 100% perfect), so if you have a 6 shot bokehrama of 40 MP you will not get a straight up 240 MP final result and it will more likely be a 150 to 200 MP images.
Always shoot more shots then you need in the bokehrama because you will need space to crop and it's better to have more data to work with that you can cut if you don't want it or need it than failing an entire stitch just because one shot did not work out because if one corner out of a 6 shot square for example fails then you have the entire side of that square unable to work unless you are willing to put in the time to heavily Photoshop in the missing data either using Cloning Tools or Content Aware Fill or the (easier option but still not fail-proof) AI Generative Fill.
And never count on just one attempt to be successful, if the image is important always do a 2nd and\or a 3rd attempt to increase your chance of a successful bokehrama because you will have to go back and set up another shot if it did not work. Given all the risks I have mentioned so far, it would be more than prudent to not leave it down to luck no matter the skill level.
Your subject must be perfectly still for at least the initial shot or initial overlap because any movement can risk failure of the entire process BUT after you get the initial overall your subject doesn't even have to be there as you add more context to the bokehrama with each image you make ... UNLESS their shadow is part of the image, then they need to continue to stay still.
Depending on the orientation of how you want to shoot the bokehrama (horizontal, vertical or square) it can be helpful to think about what orientation you want of your camera and each shot because it is easier to overall in horizontal orientation with 33-50% overlap between each image than trying to overlap a vertical shot, especially at the 3:2 aspect ratio. Also, the orientation of the camera can have an impact on how the background is rendered if the lens has a stronger personality of how it renders the bokeh and the background (swirly and lemon-shaped bokeh balls) because these effects can be stronger in horizontal orientation at the edges then vertical orientation.
Between each attempt shoot an image with your hand or the lens cap over the lens to have a dark image to signify that you have finished a sequence of one attempt, it will help you when dealing with the images in post because you will have a distinction between each attempt instead of having to guess or remember when you start one attempt and finished it, especially if you have many attempts (to increase your chances) and you start them the same way with the same orientation and the same overlap.
Sensor size will dictate how strong of an effect you can get because there is a limit of DoF you can get for each format (unless you look for unconventional lenses like f 0.95 primes). On Medium format you have f 1.4 as the fastest lens, f 1.2 is the fastest for FF (with autofocus), f 1.2 on ASP-C but that is equivalent of f 1.8 on FF, and f 1.2 on Micro Four Thirds with the equivalent of f 2.4 of FF. The stronger the effect you want on smaller formats the faster the lens you need AND the longer the Focal Length to compensate for less DoF of the smaller sensor (wider lens). (Please don't tell me about "The Truth about Equivalency" as I already know all the information about it, I'm just simplifying it here).
A FF setup can achieve a Medium Format easily and even get stronger effect. A APS-C setup CAN achieve Medium Format but will need more shots and either get closer or use longer focal length (about double of what you would need with FF) but you will not be able to get a stronger effect. A Micro Four Thirds CAN achieve Medium Format with VERY long focal length (200-300mm equivalent) AND with very fast lens (f 1.2, f 1.4 or f 1.8 at telephoto focal length) but it is very difficult and the success rate will be less reliable if you use 35-85mm equivalent focal length lenses then most you can get is a FF look or even ASP-C.
I hope this helps anyone\someone.
Will definitely give this a go Sean! Thanks for explaining and showing the method so nicely. The resolution benefits are a great bonus! One thing I noticed was the need to hold your focus-hold button. If the Sony has back button focusing this would remove the focus from the shutter button. I use this all the time with my D850 and find it exhilarating to be able to focus once and then shoot quickly without worrying about a focus shift. Thanks again Sean!
What a great video. Thanks for taking the time to produce something away from the mainstream RUclips fare. Very interesting and thought provoking.
Well and thoroughly explained with a minimum of RUclips bloviation despite this being a painstaking, multi-step process. Nicely done ...
Hi Sean
Thank you so much again for this great presentation. Love how the pictures ended up. It gives a beginner like me a tool to get medium format look!! without spending to much money. Brilliant
I noted the histogram being more to the left. Would the same picture be 'boring' if the histogram would be more centered.
Or the opposite preserving highlights. when would you choose one for the other. thank you
Ooh! I never thought about doing this with my camera! I have stitched together landscape images, but never thought about doing it with a live subject! I might give it a whirl this evening (If I can get my dog to sit still for long enough!)
I recently bought the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 for Sony and it definitely gives you that medium format look with the combination of being a relatively wide focal length with a shallow depth of field - great for environmental portraits!
One of the advantages of this technique is getting effectively impossible aperture values. 40/1.2 is great, but what about a 10/0.3? You could use your 40/1.2, use this bokehrama technique, and get an image that would be the equivalent of a 10mm lens, set to the impossible f/0.3.
This is so cool. I've done this before with landscapes to create big, sweeping images, but doing the same thing with portraits is so smart. Such an obvious idea that I never would have thought of. Thanks for the video!
I had done this a couple years ago but you had the courage to share with others..thanks
Nicely done, Sean. I enjoy your teaching style very much. Best wishes& safe travels.
Nicely done. Great presentation. I like how you explained the process with a drawing, then showed the field work and best of all showing the actual results. Great stuff!
A secret tool in my photography arsenal for almost a decade. If done right, the result is mind blowing. Awesome instructional video.
Hello Sean, great video as always!
I've been experimenting with this stitching technique as a solution to a problem - making large format documentary landscapes that can be printed in big sizes (2m, 3m length). During my research I've come across a couple of things. If you want to use this process regularly and accurately every time, you're best to use a panoramic tripod head. What it does is keep the lens' nodal point in the same place and only moves the back of the camera, so you don't get any parallax effect and the images can be stitched together way more easily. The second thing is using a specialized stitching software, I use PTGui, it lets you adjust all aspects of your panorama if some points happen to not align properly. I'm not sponsored by PTGui, but i genuinely recommend checking out their video guide series if you want to learn more about panoramas.
It really isn't easy to master, but I hope that if I do, it'll be rewarding. From what I know, Andreas Gursky also uses image stitching when creating his gigantic photographs.
Love this technique!
Did not know its name. Thanks.
Extremely versatile and usefull.
For me, stiching is the only real advantage of digital. And like with wide lenses in general, this method is playing out its magic when counterbalanceing the wide by moving in on your subjct. "Zoom out but step in". Classic 30-20mm lens movie look. Magic!
I discovered this when limiting myself to a 50mm while fighting it for being slightly too long oftentimes. Since I tend to shoot wider (40-30) and like to shoot rather open anyway, I quickly realised the different look on top of the convenience of capturing wide shots with a 50 in the first place. Especially milky way shots or panos up to 25k pixels in width (@300 print dpi...). All perfect with a 200£ lens.
In fact, I still take a stich-series regardless, even portraits, and would definitely use this method over a kit zoom anytime. Three flies with one lens... A 50mm/1.4/1.8 is "all" you really need. It can look like a 35 as well as a 70.. Most important and versatile lense of all. So many times I skipped the 24-70 for a 50. Job done... and cheap to replace when they break, but they dont...
I'd even go as far as saying: if one can not capture a shot with a 50 one will not capture it at all.
This video was so good! Love this concept! The photos are so similar in the end. Really cool
Sean you are a gem of a person. Never change.
My go to for breaking out of a rut, or just because I love the look, is to change my camera’s settings to monochrome and 1:1. I’m using either a Nikon Z6III or Z8 with an 85mm 1.8. This video gives me a lot to think about. Thank you, now following and looking forward to future posts.
People often talk about the "quality" of medium format, but I've never heard it defined so clearly. The visual explanation of how depth of field is affected based on focal length vs sensor size was super helpful as was the demo with the different cameras. I've often stitched photos to get a wider field of view when I was lacking a wide lens or bc I wanted a more detailed image, but that's always been for landscape and architecture. I'll definitely be giving this technique a try. As always, thanks for another fantastic video.
There's also the inherent quality to larger sensors picking up more photons overall for the image, and so less noise, higher resolution, more bits of color information as a whole. That being said, most don't need that.
Depth of field has nothing to do with focal length and sensor size, and everything to do with the aperture size and focus distance. What a larger sensor allows you do do is get a wider field of view.
What a larger sensor does allow, is for you to get a wider field of view at the same focal length. Which can allow you to get closer to your subject, to fill the frame. Getting closer then meaning shallower depth of field.
I was anticipating a mention of the Brenizer method, been using it for many years but often falling into the trap of taking too many images as you highlighted at 8:00. The simplicity of the technique you introduced here is very helpful 👍
Excellent video, thanks Sean. I had tried this years ago on a tree with a 50mm lens on a 5D mk 2, result was great. It's interesting to see it work on a human being to great effect, the assembling works well.
I never even knew you can photograph like this!! I will be trying this for sure!! 👍 😊
I appreciate the run-through. I've heard of the technique before and a very brief how-to (just put some images together!), but I didn't know exactly how to do so. I might have to try this!
Thank you! I was just thinking about this actually because I want to take a picture of my family and print it very very big!
Thank you so much for this video. Coming from film photography, I love the medium format look and this is something that I always wanted to achieve with digital. The prices for medium format cameras are way out of my range, so I can't wait to try this method.
Thx, i have made too big stich but the 3 photos is a good idea. I like these kind of projects. I once had a tilt/shift lens before i sold it. But i made 3 shift photos with that and they were easy to stich together.
I'm impressed that seem quite easy very nicely done Sean, as always your a fantastic resource for us all 😊
I used this technique to get a wide-angle shot with a MF folding film camera, having a fixed 75 mm lens (stitched together 4 square frames). Works for all sorts of photographic venues.
Inspirational video! I own 3 medium format systems and you got me so wanting to try this on my full-frame!
This just blew my entire mind.
Great video! My son and I did some of these kind of portraits several years ago. I wish I had your advice about keeping it simple though, I had many shots and huge files. One benefit of that is that I was able to crop the photo and get a few different versions of the same composition. I called them panorama portraits because I used the panorama function on Affinity Photo to get the results. Also because I couldn't remember the name Brenizer (?) Effect lol.
Like always I love your videos :) I would have something to add. When doing the calculation for a crop, you apply that magnification also to the aperture, not only the focal length. So a 65mm 1.4 on that Fuji with a 0.8 crop, would be equivalent to a 52mm f1.12, So with a 50mm 1.2 you were already close. And you can always use a wider aperture lens on full frame, like a Voigtlander 50mm f1.0 or a Laowa Argus 35mm f0.95, that would give you a very similar look to a medium format.
Very well explained with best advice to go and do it yourself. Cheers!
Awesome technique. Looking forward to put it in practice. Thanks for sharing!
I am definitely going to experiment with this. My Pentax K-50 APSC camera and 50mm f1.4 are a perfect combination to try it out too, thanks for the tutorial. This kind of knowledge is precious, so thank you for passing it on!
Thank you so much. I enjoy your teaching / explaining style. Excellent work with the model too!
Excellent video Sean. I really love the way you present material in a way viewers of all skills can appreciate and learn from. I am very fortunate to be able to say that the camera I “already have” is a GFX so maybe I can get the large format look (8x10?) by using this technique!? 😊
yes I thought so many times of this technique but never started to try it. many thanks.
So well explained. You are a fantastic communicator. Tbh i was shaking my head when i read the title of the video
Thank you Sean, as usual. It is so well done. And I always learn a lot from you. If one uses back button focus, wouldn't it then de- necessitate the focus hold? Thank you very much
Thank you, I used to do 360 panorama's. Now I am inspired to do medium format pictures. It will be more about a beautifull image then a technical gimmick
Hello Sean and thank you for yet another great video. I may be the silly guy in the comment section by asking this, but here it goes regardless: If the "medium format look" is wide focal length with shallow depth of field, would I achieve this look with an ultrabright manual lens. For example, the 7 Artisans 35mm for my fuji XE-4 (F.F equivalent 50mm) has an aperture of 0.95. Other than the lesser resolution, what else would be the difference to the stitching method? Thank you again!
Really well explained, thank you. Without perhaps meaning to, you also remind me why shifting from APS-C to FF was such a big game changer for me years ago, bringing me back to DoF options like I had when using my beloved Pentax MX before the digital age.
I only ise LR Mobile at the moment but it seems Apple photos for desktop also do panoramic photo stitching.
Thanks for this video, which is a shocking eye opener to myself. For some strange reason, combined panos always had a strong appeal to me. Separately from that, I was thinking to go medium format. Now I know for sure I'm a medium format person, as along the way I learned about all the limitations from light change from clouds, movements from wind and subjects moving just slightly, when doing the pano arrangements.
If I’m not mistaken, the Leica Deluxe type 109 is a small camera that you can switch the aspect ration on and you can get that medium format look. It’s only around $1400 new.
Fascinating. I think if I liked medium format I would have to go ahead and buy it (used if necessary). It's a lot more planning and work to do it with a smaller sensor. But for an occasional shot, this method is great.
Thanks for sharing this! So generous of you.
I use this method to obtain high megapixel landscape images with a m4t camera, which I print successfully to 1200 mm wide prints.
I’m too old to carry heavier cameras on multi day hikes. But I do miss the days of Hasselblad 500 CM and SinarP 4x5 sheet film cameras.
Thank you for doing this video. I’ve been contemplating this exact method for a while but wasn’t sure how to do it without a shift lens.
A problem with this technique is that the sensor will be angled slightly between the shots. A better technique, maybe, is to use a tilt shift lens (at least with full frame). That way you can make the image wider without moving the sensor.
Amazing video. I recently upgraded from an APS-C to a full-frame camera and I'am slowly beginning to realize the substantial boost in picture quality & background separation. I also know that a few years down the line, I'll definitely succumb to the temptations of a medium format. But until then, it'll be great to be able to achieve that look, especially with the environmental portraits as you rightly mentioned. I had heard of the Brenzier method before but always thought it to be too much of a hassle as opposed to just buying a 24mm or 35mm f/1.8. But the composite images that you showed had a far more interesting look than those from the wide-angle lenses. And with Lightroom, it seems easier than ever to replicate.
Thanks for the tips.
Thanks so much for sharing. This will consume my free time for the next couple of weeks
Great video, great presentation, your videos are allways a pleasure to whatch. I´ve used the stitching technique often, when the wide angle lens was not wide enough. But now I´ll try it out for that specific look.
Thank you so much for this video. Im going to try this tomorrow. Cheers from Norway
Thank you for this video. I love medium format but can't afford it. Good to know I can mimick it. As always a very clear video. Thank you for that! I have a queston though. How do you get her skin to look so natural? I avoid green environments as much as possible, because for me it is often very hard to get rid of the green color cast. I work with mid grey cards mostly. But that doesn't seem to be enough sometimes.
This is wonderful! What would it take to accomplish this effect with an M43 sensor?
Thank you so much for sharing this wonderful video Sean.
👏🏽👏🏽📸
Outstanding! Thanks for helping us think outside the box...
the brenizer method!! been doing this for almost 13 years. and 85mm is the best lens to use.
Brenizer 😂
@@thejerrycliff 😂🤦🏻♂️crap! Haha definitely meant brenizer!
@@Nightshade1881 I figured you weren’t talking about tanning makeup 😂
@@thejerrycliff 😂Ryan brenizer would be pissed that I messed up his name! I would annoy the hell out of that dude when I was first starting out! I desperately wanted to know his secrets on this technique.
Thank you for this Sean - This is amazing advice and help.
Great tutorial, Sean. I shot LF and MF on film for many years, and never really tried to approximate similar image qualities on 35mm full frame or APSC. I'll start experimenting now. Thanks for the insights.
Thanks, Sean! That gave me an idea, to try 3 shots with the GFX :D
Me too hahaha
the "use what you already have in your camera bag" advice got me thinking.. I have a Canon R5 with a speedbooster... most lenses shoot an image circle larger than what's needed.. I'm sure I can just put some EF lenses on the speedbooster and shoot wider, with the same shallow depth of field and try to get close to the medium format effect.
Nice trick! I often miss the look of medium format (film) and have never been quite satisfied with similar photos with my digital cameras.
FYI, a video tripod head would work great for this technique as you can lock vertical or horizontal panning on it, something I do to make to make large panoramic landscapes... never thought of using it for portraits
Excellent tutorial.
I am a massive fan of the channel and your work, Sean. Thanks again for another great piece of content. I have tried the Branzier method years back but I don't think it is worth the hassle. A major problem are stitching artifacts due to small changes in the environment between shots. Since I moved back mostly to analog photography anyway, I now prefer 'real' medium format. I say real, since modern digital medium format does not come even close in terms of sensor/film plan size of even the smallest 120 film medium format (645):
e.g. Fuji GFX 43.8x32.9mm sensor vs. 60x45mm. Let alone when comparing the digital with larger mf (6x6, 6x7 or even 6x9).
Photography Online had this discussion in their June 24 podcast and it is recommended to keep in mind that digital medium format is not really medium format.
The real deal can be had for a few hundred dollar/euros/pounds if you really want that look: I shoot with a Bronica ETRS (645) and an old Zeiss Ikon folder camera (6x6) and they both yield great results.
Keep up the good work and cheers everyone.
Wonderful video and subject Sean. I never considered a pano stitch for a portrait… but wow. You are such a great communicator & educator. Thank you
This was such a thoughtful and kind video. Thanks for the advice!
I use a 50mm f/1.2 in my daily walks, and tile several shots when I need a wider composition. Tools like Lightroom make the stitching so much easier :)
Excellent presentation of an excellent idea. FWIW, I've had a revelation since shooting people with my Fuji 6x9 film camera. Basically, the 100mm f/2.8 lens gives me the same perspective and depth of field on the same area of the negative that such a lens always gave me on 35mm. It's just surrounded by the environmental elements of a 43mm equivalent or so.