Maybe this has been asked before here, but I'd be interested in hearing from forum members what criteria make a blurred image a good or acceptable one?
Thanks for the input (in advance).
Jan
JanSteen wrote:
Maybe this has been asked before here, but I'd be interested in hearing from forum members what criteria make a blurred image a good or acceptable one?
Thanks for the input (in advance).
Jan
I don't' know but one thing I DO know....whatever is definition is given someone is sure to disagree with it.... :)
rpavich wrote:
I don't' know but one thing I DO know....whatever is definition is given someone is sure to disagree with it.... :)
effrant wrote:
I don't agree.....
Methinks that there is a reason that Keef is your avatar :wink:
JanSteen wrote:
Maybe this has been asked before here, but I'd be interested in hearing from forum members what criteria make a blurred image a good or acceptable one?
Thanks for the input (in advance).
Jan
Good question. I think it's interesting that there are so many articles and tutorials about how to take blurry photos. By that I mean "old fashioned," Orton effect, motion blur, etc. Such "unsharp" images can be very effective.
For example, we've all seen flowing water shot with a low shutter speed - good blur. Panning with a moving subject gives effective background blur. Using sepia with slight out-of-focus looks like the old days. Having someone bump into you as you're taking a family photo - not so good.
rpavich wrote:
JanSteen wrote:
Maybe this has been asked before here, but I'd be interested in hearing from forum members what criteria make a blurred image a good or acceptable one?
Thanks for the input (in advance).
Jan
I don't' know but one thing I DO know....whatever is definition is given someone is sure to disagree with it.... :)
i strongly dis agree with that!! :mrgreen: :hunf:
docrob wrote:
rpavich wrote:
JanSteen wrote:
Maybe this has been asked before here, but I'd be interested in hearing from forum members what criteria make a blurred image a good or acceptable one?
Thanks for the input (in advance).
Jan
I don't' know but one thing I DO know....whatever is definition is given someone is sure to disagree with it.... :)
i strongly dis agree with that!! :mrgreen: :hunf:
How did I know THAT was coming? :thumbup:
effrant wrote:
rpavich wrote:
JanSteen wrote:
Maybe this has been asked before here, but I'd be interested in hearing from forum members what criteria make a blurred image a good or acceptable one?
Thanks for the input (in advance).
Jan
I don't' know but one thing I DO know....whatever is definition is given someone is sure to disagree with it.... :)
I don't agree.....
"half of the time we're gone and we don't know where" (Only Living boy in NY)
Objection: OOF images are unacceptable to you.
JanSteen wrote:
Maybe this has been asked before here, but I'd be interested in hearing from forum members what criteria make a blurred image a good or acceptable one?
Thanks for the input (in advance).
Jan
the answer is: when it is intentional.
beat's me but i'm going drumming
MWAC
Loc: Somewhere East Of Crazy
docrob wrote:
Objection: OOF images are unacceptable to you.
I did say "For me personally........ "
Which means, that to me OOF images are unacceptable. If you think OOF images are "good" then that's your call.
MWAC wrote:
docrob wrote:
Objection: OOF images are unacceptable to you.
I did say "For me personally........ "
Which means, that to me OOF images are unacceptable. If you think OOF images are "good" then that's your call.
i do sometimes thanks for making that call
docrob wrote:
JanSteen wrote:
Maybe this has been asked before here, but I'd be interested in hearing from forum members what criteria make a blurred image a good or acceptable one?
Thanks for the input (in advance).
Jan
the answer is: when it is intentional.
That seems to be the answer that makes sense to me.
dcrob knows that I pick on out of focus images here all of the time...there is just no excuse for not getting good focus, and not getting a good focus (to me) means culling a shot and trying to get a better one next time.
BUT...
There is a post here on the Hog where a member intentionally put the bird and landscape OUT of focus and only a weed or flower (whatever it was) in focus.
I thought the image worked great because that was obviously the intent and it served the image.
This description gets my vote. :thumbup:
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.