Is it motion blur or out of focus?
Jan 10, 2014 12:52:59 #
Is there a trick to deciding motion blur vs. out of focus? I think I may have just needed a faster shutter speed. These were both taken at 1/320. The first is F 5.6. The second is F 4.5. They were taken on a 5D mark ii. Thoughts?
Jan 10, 2014 13:01:27 #
Maybe I'm missing something. I think those are amazing shots for the lighting conditions. Maybe if you sharpened a bit and raised the contrast, you'd be happier.
Jan 10, 2014 13:03:51 #
Out of focus. with an shutter speed that fast you wont have motion blur on this subject. With such a shallow DOF you have to be right on.
Jan 10, 2014 13:05:23 #
Hi!
Focus Magic has some tutorials that describe and address correction of out-of-focus and motion blur.
You may find it of interest.
Here is the link:
http://www.focusmagic.com/tutorials.htm
Thanks!
Focus Magic has some tutorials that describe and address correction of out-of-focus and motion blur.
You may find it of interest.
Here is the link:
http://www.focusmagic.com/tutorials.htm
Thanks!
Jan 10, 2014 13:36:52 #
no motion blur on those shots, a tad out of focus but still good shots all the same.
Jan 10, 2014 13:41:28 #
I don't think the blur is from motion mostly out of focus just a bit.
Why are puddles like a magnet to little kids??
Why are puddles like a magnet to little kids??
Jan 10, 2014 13:53:02 #
Jan 10, 2014 14:04:49 #
A touch out of focus...if you look at the photos, nothing is really crisp.
But they are fun shots!
But they are fun shots!
Jan 10, 2014 14:34:05 #
Your backgrounds look a little sharper than the subject. Perhaps your camera is focusing beyond your subject? I don't think it's motion blur.
Jan 10, 2014 14:47:43 #
Heirloom Tomato wrote:
Your backgrounds look a little sharper than the subject. Perhaps your camera is focusing beyond your subject? I don't think it's motion blur.
A couple of pertinent points:
1. Your lens is always focused at some particular distance, even if it's sitting in your camera bag. If your images were "out of focus", there would still be sharpness at a certain distance.
2. There are two distinct forms of "motion blur": Subject motion, and camera motion.
Your moving subjects are in focus as much as anything else in the image, but still blurred. Somehow, you are causing you camera to move (however minutely) as you release your shutter. Perhaps you were shivering in the cold!?
Jan 10, 2014 14:50:51 #
Jan 10, 2014 15:17:38 #
Danilo wrote:
A couple of pertinent points: br 1. Your lens is ... (show quote)
An interesting point Danilo, but I would think that 1/320 would dampen shutter shake...or would it?
Jan 10, 2014 15:20:23 #
If it was motion blur then "something" would be in focus, but honestly nothing seems to be. It is out of focus but probably due to your movement not hers. Bracing yourself, tripod, anything to keep you from moving. You might have been flinching to avoid being splashed!
Jan 10, 2014 15:39:59 #
ggttc wrote:
An interesting point Danilo, but I would think that 1/320 would dampen shutter shake...or would it?
I would absolutely agree with you, ggttc, but the evidence provided would appear to prove us mistaken. A very, very small amount of camera movement will go a long way toward degrading in image.
Jan 10, 2014 16:34:37 #
Danilo wrote:
I would absolutely agree with you, ggttc, but the evidence provided would appear to prove us mistaken. A very, very small amount of camera movement will go a long way toward degrading in image.
And I would absolutely agree with you, Danilo. and I have 3 or 4000 pictures to prove it.
When I was shooting for a newspaper with film I was taught that 1/60 would stop almost all camera shake and motion... it did...but 1/60 in digital hand held is a 50/50 proposition...and I have always wondered why.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.