I'm bowled over.

[Mike Buckley]

My setup prevented me from getting all of the bowl including the sides and rear rim in focus, as I had initially planned. It doesn't bother me but I wonder how you folks feel about it.

The background is a light shining through white acrylic. The tabletop is a mirror.

[Geoff F]

Possibly worth taking a couple of shots with different focus points then combining them; providing you have suitable software.

The focus isn't a long way off though.

[allenlennon]

how do you make it so the end of the mirror isnt visable?

[Steve S]

Looks allright to me , mike. Having things a little out of focus, adds depth to an image. I don't think it hurts this one a bit.

[Mike Buckley]

Thank you to Geoff and Steve for your thoughts about the depth of field. I captured this image this afternoon. I sat down to dinner tonight and my wife had changed the centerpiece of our dining room table that included a strikingly similar glass bowl. So, I asked about it. It's not the bowl that I photographed. Instead, it's the smaller bowl that I didn't remember that is part of a set that includes the larger bowl that I photographed. I wonder if the smaller bowl would have allowed me to get at least the sides in focus. Sheesh!

Allen,

The horizon of the table top was eliminated using Gaussian Blur and following that up with a Clone tool during post-processing. Even if I had not done that, the horizon is less distinctive when using a mirror as the tabletop than when using other items. That was especially true in this case when the rear of the bowl was out of focus and the tabletop horizon was even more out of focus.

[Steve S]

Thank you to Geoff and Steve for your thoughts about the depth of field. I captured this image this afternoon. I sat down to dinner tonight and my wife had changed the centerpiece of our dining room table that included a strikingly similar glass bowl. So, I asked about it. It's not the bowl that I photographed. Instead, it's the smaller bowl that I didn't remember that is part of a set that includes the larger bowl that I photographed. I wonder if the smaller bowl would have allowed me to get at least the sides in focus. Sheesh!

Allen,

The horizon of the table top was eliminated using Gaussian Blur and following that up with a Clone tool during post-processing. Even if I had not done that, the horizon is less distinctive when using a mirror as the tabletop than when using other items. That was especially true in this case when the rear of the bowl was out of focus and the tabletop horizon was even more out of focus.

Why is it you can't get the whole bowl in focus?

[Mike Buckley]

Steve,

I'm using the smallest aperture on the lens, which is f/22. I could get the entire bowl in focus using only one capture if I use a different setup that would require making one of the following changes:

1) Moving the bowl farther away from the camera, though in the present setup there is not much more room on the tabletop to do so;

2) Perhaps use a shorter focal length, which would provide a larger depth of field (I'll try that, though I'm skeptical because doing so also requires moving the camera closer to the background for reasons explained below and, thus, moving it also closer to the subject); or

3) Enlarge the size of the bright background. This particular method of creating the photo requires filling the frame, no more and no less, with the background. If I use a background that is so much larger that I could move it and the subject dramatically farther away from the camera, that would do the trick. However, this alternative might require such a large background that would exceed the size of my white acrylic.

[Mike Buckley]

Changing the focal length from 35mm to 24mm got everything in focus. However, I had to raise the camera a bit to achieve approximately the same perspective (relationship between the front and rear rims of the bowl). Making that change also changed the patterns of light, which were less attractive.

[Steve S]

I was thinking a longer focal length and moving further away would do it.

[Mike Buckley]

I was thinking a longer focal length and moving further away would do it.

My makeshift studio is too small to move far enough away to accommodate changing from 35mm to 85mm.