<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Variety: The Incredible Spice of the Palouse	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2014/06/14/variety-the-incredible-spice-of-the-palouse/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2014/06/14/variety-the-incredible-spice-of-the-palouse/</link>
	<description>The blog of bird photographer Arthur Morris</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2014 14:29:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Arthur Morris/BIRDS AS ART		</title>
		<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2014/06/14/variety-the-incredible-spice-of-the-palouse/comment-page-1/#comment-1259528</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arthur Morris/BIRDS AS ART]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2014 14:29:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/?p=20682#comment-1259528</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2014/06/14/variety-the-incredible-spice-of-the-palouse/comment-page-1/#comment-1258462&quot;&gt;Conrad Bester&lt;/a&gt;.

Hi Conrad, 

Good question.  What appears flat is not always perfectly flat. With long focal lengths depth-of-field is measured in small fractions of an inch.  A quick check shows that dof was about 1.44 inches in front of the plane of focus so you are right I could have opened up a bit.  Notice that I was at f/13 not at f/22.  IAC, I would have been concerned about having enough d-o-f had I been at f/5.6.  artie]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2014/06/14/variety-the-incredible-spice-of-the-palouse/comment-page-1/#comment-1258462">Conrad Bester</a>.</p>
<p>Hi Conrad, </p>
<p>Good question.  What appears flat is not always perfectly flat. With long focal lengths depth-of-field is measured in small fractions of an inch.  A quick check shows that dof was about 1.44 inches in front of the plane of focus so you are right I could have opened up a bit.  Notice that I was at f/13 not at f/22.  IAC, I would have been concerned about having enough d-o-f had I been at f/5.6.  artie</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Conrad Bester		</title>
		<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2014/06/14/variety-the-incredible-spice-of-the-palouse/comment-page-1/#comment-1258462</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Conrad Bester]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2014 08:19:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/?p=20682#comment-1258462</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Sorry I&#039;m a bit late on this one. Artie, can you please explain to me why you stopped down for the &#039;Old barn close-up&#039; image? Why would you require extra depth-of-field for a flat surface that is perpendicular to you?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry I&#8217;m a bit late on this one. Artie, can you please explain to me why you stopped down for the &#8216;Old barn close-up&#8217; image? Why would you require extra depth-of-field for a flat surface that is perpendicular to you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
