Is it motion blur or out of focus? (Page 2): First image looks like subject motion blur. Look at the street texture detail. It is sharp. Second image the street texture detail is...

ronwande Loc: Hendersonville NC

First image looks like subject motion blur. Look at the street texture detail. It is sharp. Second image the street texture detail is stretched out horizontally, which has to be camera motion.

jim quist Loc: Missouri

If something in the photo is in focus then the blur shows motion. if nothing is in focus, then it is out of focus.

NOTLguy Loc: Niagara on the Lake, Ontario

Danilo wrote:

A couple of pertinent points: br 1. Your lens is ... (show quote)

Agreed. I downloaded the shot and looked for some part of the scene that was in focus, but couldn't find one. The camera was definitely moving, ever so slightly.

I think the shots are still keepers though.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Speaking of motion blur, doesn't the cloud version of PS6 have a correction for that?

amehta Loc: Boston

It's great that you want these shots to be better than they are. The camera is certainly capable. What lens are you using? To answer your question of out of focus or motion blur, look at her hair. There is a little blur, but mostly it is soft, which suggests focus issues. Which focus mode were you using? Part of the problem with the second shot might be that she is running towards you, and possibly exceeding the speed limit. ;-)

greenhillbob

Took liberty of running file through camera shake reduction filter and see some improvement

John Howard Loc: SW Florida and Blue Ridge Mountains of NC.

Agreed. If it was fast enough to catch the water splash, it was fast enough to catch the girl. Maybe focused in front of her?

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Both are perfectly acceptable to me although they need some sharpening.
The shutter speed should ALWAYS be higher than the focal length of the lens in use and that is basic photography. If you use a 200mm lens your shutter speed for action should never be BELOW 1/200sec. unless the camera is on a tripod which makes following the action a little bit awkward.
Consider also to raise the ISO speed if necessary.

naturepics43 Loc: Hocking Co. Ohio - USA

canadiaman wrote:

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?

Since you already know there is a problem with these images, lets proceed from that point.

I see maybe three (3) possible problems. (1) Subject motion blur, shutter speed too slow. (2) Out of focus, were you using continuous AF mode? (3) Camera shake, possible from stabbing the shutter button in the excitement of the moment. I don't know how to read Canon EXIF info completely (I shoot Nikon) but would think that a 40mm lens should have something in focus. Depending on what AF area mode and whether you were using single point AF, these all contribute to the end result.

Without knowing ALL the camera settings, it's hard to recommend what to do for future shots like this.

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

canadiaman wrote:

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?

Being super critical, and having blown them up to full size, they are out of focus. But as seen in the smaller, posted size I see what appears to be motion blur in both. But, as already stated, given the lighting I'm not surprised by that at all with the shutter speed you had to use.

I like both, she is so cute... your daughter? I love her look of satisfaction at splashing in the puddle. Little kids are so much fun.

CHuckle's Loc: Lockhart, Texas

tramsey wrote:

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??

You are so right! Some of my favorite pics of my now 20 yr old are puddle shots...he he! :thumbup:

romanticf16 Loc: Commerce Twp, MI

I may be wrong, but I could swear the point of focus is slightly behind the girl in both images? In either case a flash would have illuminated her and the duration of the flash would have been much faster than the shutter speed he took the photos at, IMHO.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

After close examination, my opinion would be that it is a combination of all three.
Because there is really no part of the images that are in perfect focus would indicate camera movement.
The subject is definitely less sharp than the background showing that she is definitely badly out of focus.
Because the subject is not evenly out of focus would indicate subject movement.

Robeng Loc: California

canadiaman wrote:

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?

Out of focus! Cute model.

amehta Loc: Boston

romanticf16 wrote:

I may be wrong, but I could swear the point of focus is slightly behind the girl in both images? In either case a flash would have illuminated her and the duration of the flash would have been much faster than the shutter speed he took the photos at, IMHO.

If she was out of focus, would the flash help, or make it even more obvious that she's out of focus?