Tips on getting foreground clear / background blurry shot with Canon XF100

Hi All; as the topic says I am trying to achieve a foreground in focus / background blurry effect for some interview style shots for a project I am working on. Based on my reading it seems like you want to set your aperture small, have the camera close to your subject, and have the background far away from the subject. I've tried to do this (aperture 1.8, subject 2 feet from camera, background maybe 12 feed back from them), but I'm not achieving the desired effect — everything still seems to be in focus or not together (rather than having the person in focus and the background blurry, as I would like.).

Furthermore, I've seen some examples on YouTube that seem to be getting this effect without a huge distance between the subject and background, such as illustrated by this video (note the computer and such behind him is blurry):



Can anyone suggest to me what I am doing wrong / give tips to achieve this effect? I'm sure it something that is commonly done, so I must be missing something basic. Thanks!

Another important factor is the size of the camera sensor. For depth of field control you need a large sensor. The XF100's is quite small.

Aperture small (assuming you mean small number & therefore wide open) - yes. Use less light and/or ND filters to help achieve that.

The next easiest thing to do is use a longer focal length. That usually means that the camera should be further away from the subject. If your camera is close to the subject, then (depending on your framing) there is a good chance that your focal length is wider and therefore your DOF won't be as shallow.

If the background is further back from the subject then that will help it be softer focus in case the depth of field is still too large for your taste but it doesn't actually change the DOF.

Cheers!

---> Jarrod

Scotopia,
Think Tom may be correct on this, but haven't shot with the XF100 myself. One benefit of DSLR shooting is the ability to change lens and play with depth of field.

Not mentioned here is doing this in post. The latest version of FCPX has great masking ability and blurring effects, or you can go 3rd party plug-ins. If your subject is not moving around, then pretty easy. Just thought I'd throw this alternative out there.

Hope this helps, Greg

Thanks for the responses guys. I messed around with it for a while and figured out a decent path doing this with the XF100. Basically I place the subject about 6-8 feet in front of the camera with the background maybe 8-10 feet behind that, zoom way in to really focus on the subject, and then zoom out a bit, but still somewhat zoomed (as the zoom magnifies the difference in clarity).

That being said, I think I might be in the market to buy a new camera: anyone have suggestions for a great one assuming I'd be doing mostly youtube stuff like the above linked style, and also ones with a similar format to this: ? I'm willing to go some price tiers up from the XF100, but I would like something similarly portable (a little bigger is okay) if possible. Thanks!

Any ideas on the camera suggestion?

Also thanks for the suggestions VidGreg of looking into focus blur effect in combination with shape masks; I gave that a whirl and the results were awesome!

If this is not the best thread to ask the camera suggestion question, can someone please direct me towards the best place to do so. Thanks!

Of course, it always depends on what you are trying to achieve or deliver but the Canon 5D MK11 has a large sensor which produces an excellent shallow depth of field result - even at some smaller apertures. Here's a couple of frame grabs from a short I made using the 5D. In each shot the camera was about 6 feet away from the subject and the background was 10+ feet behind.

I see used Canon 5D's around for about $1K too.

Here's another shot

One of the cheaper "larger sensor cameras" on the market is the Sony a5100, you can also change the lens on it too!
it also shoots on a fairly good codec (xcvc-s), and the video ain't terrible at all.
There are many downsides to straying into the "DSLR/mirrorless style cameras, audio being one, battery life another, but it may work for you.

But if your going to web already, you may already have your own workarounds for these cameras limitations.

... distances of subject and background to camera, focus length, aperture ... quite simple.

Being on a low budget, I used in attached example my Sony Nex5 (sensor size APS-C, ~250€), an old Canon glas (50mm/f1.4, ~40€) attached via an adapter (China, 10€) => see attached screen-grab: even in my small garden a nice shallow bg ....

And: get some ND-filter, to allow 'open aperture' even on a sunny day.

Actually using a Lumix FZ1k: offers a socalled 1"-sensor (=it isn't 1", ... but large enough) => offers shallow DoF too ... use the zoom lense, a lil' 'tele' = you get shalllow DoF instantly ...

I also used a Canon XF100 for a few years - recently updated to the Sony X70, which has a 1" sensor compared to the XF100's 1/3" sensor. It's still not *super* shallow, but does provide noticeably less DOF even though the lens is slower.

Thanks for the tips and suggestions everyone; I think I definitely have the effect I was looking for down pat.

As for the camera; any other suggestions or excellent camcorders $5000ish or less that would be an upgrade from my XF100? Something similarly portable or only slightly bigger would be ideal. Also, if there are any reasons why you think I should be looking at DSLRs rather than camcorders let me know.

Thanks all!

scotopia wrote: ... any other suggestions or excellent camcorders $5000ish or less that would be an upgrade from my XF100? ... Also, if there are any reasons why you think I should be looking at DSLRs rather than camcorders let me know.

just 2nd hand knowledge, but I'm an enthusiastic reader .... :
BlackMagicPocketCam - last years hype ... asks for a 'rig', no audio recording, etc etc Fully equipped no more 'pocket'. Swapable glas ...

vDSLRs - optics changeable, bigger sensors, but no point'n-shoot-device (esp. autofocus); not made for 'hours' of recording (my lil' Sony Nex5 gets really hot after 30min ....)

... I guess, in your price range, overall 'handling' is the key-factor, 'cause in 'qualiry' the differences are small. recording media, codecs, DR, range of supported optics, 'needed' add-ons (ext. recorders for audio and video, batteries... ) ....

You could also buy a second hand older dslr like a canon 550d on eBay ect incredibly cheaply and experiment to see if thats the kind of look you are after!

"BlackMagicPocketCam - last years hype ... asks for a 'rig', no audio recording, etc etc Fully equipped no more 'pocket'. Swapable glas ..."

We use a Pocket Cinema Camera, and yes, it is a pocket camera if you want it to be, a full rig when you need it to be. Records audio just fine, with excellent audio meters, too. We love it. For HD it is one of the best cameras I've ever used. I also use it for family stuff now, also, instead of my DLSR because it's easier to manage and smaller. A rig isn't necessary with this camera. I highly recommend it. We also use a BMD Production 4K, but not nearly as often as we use the very versatile and amazing Pocket camera.

Ben, do you find the Pocket Camera to be realistically hand-holdable?

To the Orig. Poster:
If you prefer a traditional video camera, there are now more options than ever before with larger than 1/2 inch sensors. In the <$5K bracket...
Sony AX100
Sony X70
JVC's new cameras, one is like the X70, but the xx300 has a 4/3 sensor and interchangeable lenses
I'm very interested in the new Panasonic DVX200 coming out this fall. Looks like a traditional video cam but has a 4/3 sensor and does HD @ 120fps and 4K @ 60p. Estimated price is "less than $5K"
If you don't need anything faster than 30p and don't need 4K, a great option is still the Canon C100 (mk 1) which is now only $3500 and that includes the autofocus option. It has the largest sensor of any of these.

As hand holdable as a DSLR. I use it hand held. But any camera should be on a tripod as much as potable. But yeah, you can hand hold it. I do it, I don't have any more issues with it than I do with any other DSLR shaped camera body.

The Pocket Cinema Cam looks interesting. I have a few questions (pardon if they are stupid; still new to hardware):

1. Some reviews say it doesn't handle low light well, is it worse than the XF100 and/or can it be improved with a attachments?

2. Doesn't look like it takes XLR for audio; is that problem / are there workarounds? (or are you just supposed to use a boom and record audio seperately).

3. What rigs / attachments would I need to buy to make sure that everything I can currently do with my XF100 I can do better with this?

Thanks!

1- Handles as well as most other cameras. Some cameras are better, some are not. It is better now due to more latitude in shutter angle and ISO adjustments from firmware updates. It does what I need it to do. No camera is 100% perfect for 100% of all shooting environments, gotta evaluate according to what you shoot. For me, it works just fine.

2- No, but I have an XLR adapter that is very simple. A JuiceLink would work great with it (not what I use). Mostly, I'm using the built-in mics (which rock, believe it or not) or recording via an iRig to my iPhone. Same as with any other video camera.

3- Depends on what you're shooting, what your specific needs are. Just like any other camera. You get a body, then get the lenses, rails, rigs, lights, etc, that you personally need.

It is a camera that has taken some bashing, but is way better than most folks really think it is. Lots of info and video work here.
www.facebook.com/BMCCusers/timeline