Re: [Leica] depth of field..depth of focus?

[dmorton@journalist.co.uk (David Morton)]

Ted Grant wrote:
> 
> I had a young photo student ask me, "Why do they call it depth of field
> when it's really a kind of "depth of focus?"
> 
> In technical terms it's "depth of field". But when you think about 
> calling
> it, the "shallow depth of field" to a newby, then you have to go into a
> whole story about what the depth of field is.  Wouldn't it be easier or 
> at
> least more visually  understanding if "shallow depth of focus" were 
> used?

No, because 'Depth of Focus' already has a widely accepted meaning, which 
is different to 'Depth of Field'.

Depth of *Focus* is defined as the range of *image* distances that 
correspond to the range of *object* distances covered by the Depth of 
Field.