There's most probably no relation whatsoever - the path doesn't lead up to the old castle that in turn is part of the fortress that streches the whole length of the ridge above; I know that for certain because I took the path ... The house itself looks as if it was actually built to fit between the (older?) path and the road that was a major thoroughfare until maybe fifty years ago. Its ground-plan is decidedly irregular; there's actually a sequence of buildings that seem to have been squeezed into what little space was available between the road and the rock face ...Interesting juxtaposition. Is the foreground house a caretaker residence for the larger manor house up on the hill, or are narrow paths running so close to private residences common over there?
@MiguelATF Thank you, Miguel! And you are right, there is something of with that image
It is in fact an approach that is called BOKEH PANORAMA or BRENIZER METHOD (named after the wedding photographer who invented it, or revived the old idea and popularized it, depending who you ask - you can find a lot about it if you google one of those terms).
Basically, you shoot longer (and preferably faster) lens relatively close to the subject and thus obtain the shallow DOF - it gives that nice creamy look, but very tight view of the subject, naturally. But with the same manual settings (focus and WB) you continue to shoot around the subject (overlapping images by third or half of the frame, once again depending who you ask about it) until you have enough frames to obtain the wider composition you desire. After all the shots are bagged, you have to stitch them in Photoshop (or other software) to obtain the final image (sometimes it is relatively easy, sometimes very difficult or impossible for the software, so you either have to give up or stitch it manually).
It is a bit tedious method, more demanding in planning, executing and processing, but when everything falls in place, it can give a beautiful kind of look, a wide-angle image with shallow DOF which I particularly like. Bokeh panoramas are sometimes referred to as "medium format look for the poor"... Even more so; with some effort invested in mastering the technique, you can obtain "results" of lenses that don't even exist. There is a calculator for the effective focal length and resulting aperture depending on the lens you use, the number of frames stitched and distance to subject, but I'm to weak in math and physics to actually master it. Or I'm just lazy; I'm more interested in the look of final image than bragging about the "impossible" aperture I managed to achieve.
The previous image I posted, the one that made you ask the question, was composed from 80 frames, 10 rows of 8 frames, overlapping about 50 percent. The individual frames were shot with TTArtisan 50mm f1.2 lens, at f1.2, but as it is all manual lens, Fuji XE2 cannot record the exif properly.
Here is another example that fits this thread; it is my favorite image from our brief vacation. This one is composed of "only" 48 frames but the effect is even more pronounced as the background was further away from the fence, allowing for even more compression and creamyness.
View attachment 269914
Very inspiring. Thanks. Make it or I’ll fake it