The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Focusing and depth of field in photography: application in dermatology practice
Abstract
Background Conventional photography obtains a sharp image of objects within a given 'depth of field'; objects not within the depth of field are out of focus. In recent years, digital photography revolutionized the way pictures are taken, edited, and stored. However, digital photography does not result in a deeper depth of field or better focusing. Methods In this article, we briefly review the concept of depth of field and focus in photography as well as new technologies in this area. Results A deep depth of field is used to have more objects in focus; a shallow depth of field can emphasize a subject by blurring the foreground and background objects. The depth of field can be manipulated by adjusting the aperture size of the camera, with smaller apertures increasing the depth of field at the cost of lower levels of light capture. Light-field cameras are a new generation of digital cameras that offer several new features, including the ability to change the focus on any object in the image after taking the photograph. Conclusion Understanding depth of field and camera technology helps dermatologists to capture their subjects in focus more efficiently.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- 10.1109/34.121783 · DOI
- RenNg.Digital light field photography. Available at:http://www.lytro.com/renng-thesis.pdf(Accessed 30 August 2012)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Proposed Technical Guidelines for the Acquisition of Clinical Images of Skin-Related Conditions
Finnane, A., Curiel-Lewandrowski, C., Wimberley, G., Caffery, L., Katragadda, C., Halpern, A., Marghoob, A. A., Malvehy, J., Kittler, H., Hofmann-Wellenhof, R., et al. (2017) · JAMA Dermatology · doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.6214 · Cited by 89
Dermoscopy practice guidelines for use in telemedicine
Deda, L. C., Goldberg, R. H., Jamerson, T. A., Lee, I., & Tejasvi, T. (2022) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-022-00587-9 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Taheri, A., Yentzer, B. A., & Feldman, S. R.
- Affiliations
- Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
- Corresponding author
- Taheri, Arash
- Venue
- Skin Research and Technology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-03-25
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 394-397
- ISSN
- 0909-752X (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0846
- OpenAlex
- W1990527617
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 1.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Skin Research and Technology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Amgen
- Bristol-Myers Squibb
- GlaxoSmithKline
- Galderma
- Genentech
- Allergan
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Digital Imaging in Medicine
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Image Processing Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Photography and Visual Culture
- Keywords
- depth of field, camera focus, dermatologic photography, aperture size, light field camera, digital photography, image blurring, camera technology
- MeSH terms
- Dermatology, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Photography, Skin Diseases, Dermoscopy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review