Fandango: Merriam-Webster definition is lively double or triple time Spanish dance, or tomfoolery. I originally incorrectly posted this photo in the Critique section but only got...

GregWCIL Loc: Illinois

Merriam-Webster definition is lively double or triple time Spanish dance, or tomfoolery.

I originally incorrectly posted this photo in the Critique section but only got responses saying it was blurry. (sure is) I have hundreds of very sharp hummingbird photos. But I happened to run across this one and it caught my eye.

I was hoping for a discussion of the merits of using blur, so I have come here. I was once berated for pointing out a Henri Cartier-Bresson image wasn't in focus. So when is it allowed or even preferred?

(Download)

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

So glad you posted for discussion, Greg!

Blur allowed - whenever you want; it's your image, do what you want to it

Blur preferred - for me, it would be to emphasize a mood or emotion.

In this image the swirl of colors and motion is mesmerizing. I find myself curious about how going even slightly more blurry/abstract would look. Would you mind if we played with a bit?

GregWCIL Loc: Illinois

Linda From Maine wrote:

So glad you posted for discussion, Greg!

Blur allowed - whenever you want; it's your image, do what you want to it

Blue preferred - for me, it would be to emphasize a mood or emotion.

In this image the swirl of colors and motion is mesmerizing. I find myself curious about how going even slightly more blurry/abstract would look. Would you mind if we played with a bit?

Anyone can try anything they wish as long as you try to explain to this old guy how to do it. Thanks.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Hummingbirds might well impossible to capture sharp except for some body parts, like the head. I am not anywhere near an expert but my opinion is the background is too blurred to show much about the environment. But then pictures do send a message and you may have one.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

GregWCIL wrote:

Anyone can try anything they wish as long as you try to explain to this old guy how to do it. Thanks.

I ended up going more subdued than I originally envisioned as the rich jewel tones of this species drew me in. The idea was to remove the contrasts of white and some of the brighter background in order to focus our attention to the movement of the birds and their interaction - making the image more of an abstract than just a blurry shot

First layer was Topaz Simplify oil paint, which removed some detail and gave a bit of texture.

Then I went about cloning the brightest and whitest areas and also softening a couple of the edges of the wings (which I'm not totally happy with). The blue tones were via a Nik Color Efex filter called color stylizer. A vignette-type effect was done via Nik Color Efex darken edges/lighten center filter.

Thanks for the opportunity!

(Download)

Yours as posted
Yours as posted...

(Download)

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

GregWCIL wrote:

I was hoping for a discussion of the merits of using blur...

If you Google "motion blur photography" there are articles on how to achieve, but also look at the images in the search result. Very instructive and inspiring! Abstracts, to emphasize energy and speed (such as panning), and much more.

We have had a few topics in FYC, by magnetoman and ebrunner as I recall. Seems like there was at least one share thread; maybe someone can help as I can't access my memory at the moment

Panning:
http://digital-photography-school.com/mastering-panning-to-photograph-moving-subjects/

--

GregWCIL Loc: Illinois

Linda From Maine wrote:

I ended up going more subdued than I originally en... (show quote)

Linda, you are quite the artist. I really like your rich colors. Not sure I'm willing to give up the whites. In the case of the front bird, those are the epaulets of a Buff-winged Starfrontlet and the back one is a Sapphire-vented Puffleg (their names are as wild as their colors.) Just for reference I've attached a couple of photos showing them when they aren't fighting.

Buff-winged Starfrontlet
Buff-winged Starfrontlet...

(Download)

Sapphire-vented Puffleg
Sapphire-vented Puffleg...

(Download)

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

GregWCIL wrote:

So when is it allowed or even preferred?

Any time you want to use it in my opinion and preferred here to present your vision as you see fit, well done.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

GregWCIL wrote:

Linda, you are quite the artist. I really like your rich colors. Not sure I'm willing to give up the whites. In the case of the front bird, those are the epaulets of a Buff-winged Starfrontlet and the back one is a Sapphire-vented Puffleg (their names are as wild as their colors.) Just for reference I've attached a couple of photos showing them when they aren't fighting.

Thanks for letting me play, Greg

Seeing your gorgeous "still" photos, I understand better about the white tufts, especially.

GregWCIL Loc: Illinois

Linda From Maine wrote:

Thanks for letting me play, Greg

Seeing your gorgeous "still" photos, I understand better about the white tufts, especially.

Well, that's my personal attachment from being there. But since this whole thread is about movement and interpretation I think you are right that it is mainly preference.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

As you're being told by others here, use it when you want to. In this case, it makes a very pleasing art image - that such is not always appreciated by others matters not a toss. Big question - did you do it intentionally or just happen upon it? If intentional, very well done. If unintentional, very well done for finding the art in it. I hope it leads you to more.

GregWCIL Loc: Illinois

magnetoman wrote:

As you're being told by others here, use it when you want to. In this case, it makes a very pleasing art image - that such is not always appreciated by others matters not a toss. Big question - did you do it intentionally or just happen upon it? If intentional, very well done. If unintentional, very well done for finding the art in it. I hope it leads you to more.

Well, Magnetoman, I have a confession to make. I went to look at the exif data to see what settings I had and it turns out I didn't make any settings at all. This photo was taken with my wife's little Sony A6000. And I imagine she was the one behind the camera although I did try it at times. I run all her photos through Lightroom and catalog the originals in the Sony sub-folder, but I had exported it to a folder with all our saved images from the trip.

So the credit belongs to her. She isn't a "technical" photographer at all. But she does have a good eye for scenes. I usually set her camera on aperture priority and for sure wide open for these shots since it was cloudy most of the time and we were struggling with the low light.

I will show her this thread so she can see the nice comments.

pfrancke Loc: cold Maine

love their motion and dance and bold swirls everywhere. It has a charming mood to it and I can see it on a wall in a way that many sharp images never would be.

GregWCIL Loc: Illinois

pfrancke wrote:

love their motion and dance and bold swirls everywhere. It has a charming mood to it and I can see it on a wall in a way that many sharp images never would be.

Maybe I shouldn't show this to my wife. She might decide to take my camera away.

pfrancke Loc: cold Maine

GregWCIL wrote:

Maybe I shouldn't show this to my wife. She might decide to take my camera away.

LOL - but then you might get a new one!