Saturday Market: Not quite "tack sharp"! C & C welcome.

Pilot 6 Loc: Eugene, OR

Not quite "tack sharp"! C & C welcome.

(Download)

catalint Loc: oslo

Hi Pilot6,

I don't want to sound negative, and unreasonable, but this does not give me anything, besides struggle. Is there a market or a guy paying an instrument? My pupils are like in a very fast auto-focus mode that struggles to find "A" subject. Since it's named "Saturday Market", I would expect to be able to see something about it, and the way it's capture it does not show much. Everything is out of focus, and no subject to follow. Maybe the effect would have worked in an another situation. I've seen other photos made using same technique, but not where places and people are photographed. But this is my personal opinion, and I've never experimented with this kind of effects since it's not in my taste.

Cheers
C.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Exif info:
Camera Model: NIKON D3300
Lens: AF-S DX VR Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G II
Image Date: 2016-09-24
Focal Length: 18mm
Aperture: ƒ/22.0
Exposure Time: 0.167 s (1/6-sec)
ISO equiv: 100
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No

Nightski

I'm struggling. I like it. The colours hold my eye, and there is depth to the image. My eye do want to see one little thing sharp, but still .. I do like things like this. The killer for me is the bum of the guy in foreground left. It blocks the view. I would have waited a moment for him to move out of that position.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

I have a few like this. Was it intentional? It reminds me of a few impressionistic paintings I've seen.

Pilot 6 Loc: Eugene, OR

catalint wrote:

Hi Pilot6, br br I don't want to sound negative,... (show quote)

Hi Catalint
Neither negative or unreasonable--and sorry for the struggle. What can I say? It is intentional, and is what it is. My concerns are shapes and colors and their relationships. Subjects?---not so much.
Thanks for looking and responding.
bob

Pilot 6 Loc: Eugene, OR

Nightski wrote:

I'm struggling. I like it. The colours hold my eye, and there is depth to the image. My eye do want to see one little thing sharp, but still .. I do like things like this. The killer for me is the bum of the guy in foreground left. It blocks the view. I would have waited a moment for him to move out of that position.

Hi Sandra- I've tried it without the guy and decided that his sweater is worth the bummer of his bum. Been trying slow exposures, deliberate camera movement and double/triple exposures. Stimulating! More will probably follow.
What has happened to this section?
regards-
bob

Pilot 6 Loc: Eugene, OR

AzPicLady wrote:

I have a few like this. Was it intentional? It reminds me of a few impressionistic paintings I've seen.

Thanks for looking and responding, AzPicLady. It was intentional. Successful??
Bob

Nightski

Pilot 6 wrote:

Hi Sandra- I've tried it without the guy and decided that his sweater is worth the bummer of his bum. Been trying slow exposures, deliberate camera movement and double/triple exposures. Stimulating! More will probably follow.
What has happened to this section?
regards-
bob

I don't know, Bob .. but keep posting. I for one will be looking forward to it.

PaulG Loc: Western Australia

I love the idea Bob but in this instance to me there is far too much going on for there to be a particular interest/focal point. This sort of creativity works better for a relatively defined or single subject. Imagine this effect on, say, a dancer, or a single musician. With what you have created here anything not important to the story of the image will be a distraction (unfortunately). And the subject needs to fill the frame to grab and demand attention. Great idea though and one well worth perserverance and experimentation.

Pilot 6 Loc: Eugene, OR

PaulG wrote:

I love the idea Bob but in this instance to me the... (show quote)

Thanks for looking, PaulG. I really appreciate your thoughtful comments. Here is a cropped version at the suggestion of Sandra Nightski.
bob

(Download)

PaulG Loc: Western Australia

Pilot 6 wrote:

Thanks for looking, PaulG. I really appreciate your thoughtful comments. Here is a cropped version at the suggestion of Sandra Nightski.
bob

Hi Bob... yes, I gathered Sandra had a "bum issue" (

), me too actually. It's better but for me there is still far too much happening - the tree, umbrella, various frameworks and building bits - to be able to determine exactly what the main focus is. If you can, I would try the same effect again on a different image but really fill the frame with what is the central theme. You will be surprised of the impact it might have.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Pilot 6 wrote:

Not quite "tack sharp"! C & C welcome.

Hi, Bob,
With camera motion effect the need for a strong compositional contribution is much increased. It is lacking here and the intentional motion blur obscures other aspects of the scene that may have been of interest.

I' m curious about what you saw in this scene that prompted the use of camera motion.

Keep on trying...and try to find subjects and scenes that will be complemented by camera motion, rather than simply obscured by it.

Best,
Dave

10MPlayer Loc: California

I read the other comments trying to understand it. I'm sorry but a just don't see the point.

Pilot 6 Loc: Eugene, OR

Uuglypher wrote:

Hi, Bob,
With camera motion effect the need for a strong compositional contribution is much increased. It is lacking here and the intentional motion blur obscures other aspects of the scene that may have been of interest.

I' m curious about what you saw in this scene that prompted the use of camera motion.

Keep on trying...and try to find subjects and scenes that will be complemented by camera motion, rather than simply obscured by it.

Best,
Dave

Dave, I really appreciate your interest, and have thought long and hard on how to respond. I disagree with your first sentence. When I went out to photograph that morning, blur WAS my subject. My camera was set to AP with the smallest aperture, ISO to the slowest with auto ISO off, vibe reduction off, and focal length not too short so as to minimize DOF. I shot without changing settings, instinctively and impulsively, hoping that what ever might be left of my "eye" would yield a keeper or two. So, camera motion was a given, not something decided on for that scene. My goal was (and is) strong images, balanced shapes and colors--pictures that work---without regard for a story, subject matter, or any compositional rules. For me (in my 90s) abstract RULES, even if there are identifiable humans or objects in the scene. My interest is 99% focused (or in this case, de-focused) on what I can get straight from the camera.
Bob