Movement on The Wall: Following my earlier post and advice from Frank, here's the shot with motion introduced. I'd not tried Motion Blur in Ps previously

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

Following my earlier post and advice from Frank, here's the shot with motion introduced. I'd not tried Motion Blur in Ps previously - it seems to have a major advantage over panning in that it's controllable. My doubt here is in regard to the compere (we know he couldn't have been doing that and riding at the same time, but thats not the point) - he wouldn't have been sharp if it was panned, but it would have looked a mess if he wasn't sharp, so.....What do you think of it?

(Download)

Dave Chinn

magnetoman wrote:

Following my earlier post and advice from Frank, here's the shot with motion introduced. I'd not tried Motion Blur in Ps previously - it seems to have a major advantage over panning in that it's controllable. My doubt here is in regard to the compere (we know he couldn't have been doing that and riding at the same time, but thats not the point) - he wouldn't have been sharp if it was panned, but it would have looked a mess if he wasn't sharp, so.....What do you think of it?

The motion blur is a much improvement, Dave. Shows us a more realistic version of whats going on, even though we already know.
Dave

AnthonyM Loc: Pasadena, CA

The blur helps. The loss in sharpness is a small price to pay for making a dynamic image.
I'll bet you found applying blur in PS indeed less nauseating than standing in the center and trying to pan motorcycles 18 feet away!

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

AnthonyM wrote:

The blur helps. The loss in sharpness is a small price to pay for making a dynamic image.
I'll bet you found applying blur in PS indeed less nauseating than standing in the center and trying to pan motorcycles 18 feet away!

Quite! Well, actually I didn't try panning - with them so close I thought I might throw up. Or fall over! I don't think there's a loss of sharpness in the subjects - at least, not from the effect, as they are composite elements - maybe a bit on standing-mans bike as that is part of the base layer, but it doesn't distract? Thanks for commenting.

AnthonyM Loc: Pasadena, CA

You're right. What you want to be sharp is.
My point was the overall image has more impact with the blur. Sorry about that small misunderstanding.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

AnthonyM wrote:

You're right. What you want to be sharp is.
My point was the overall image has more impact with the blur. Sorry about that small misunderstanding.

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

magnetoman wrote:

Following my earlier post and advice from Frank, here's the shot with motion introduced. I'd not tried Motion Blur in Ps previously - it seems to have a major advantage over panning in that it's controllable. My doubt here is in regard to the compere (we know he couldn't have been doing that and riding at the same time, but thats not the point) - he wouldn't have been sharp if it was panned, but it would have looked a mess if he wasn't sharp, so.....What do you think of it?

I like the motion blur; but to be honest, the "What in the world is that..." response that the first photo elicited was one of the qualities that really made that photo attractive. So, I basically like them both for different reasons. The choice as to which one gets the nod is really tough.
Erich

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

ebrunner wrote:

I like the motion blur; but to be honest, the "What in the world is that..." response that the first photo elicited was one of the qualities that really made that photo attractive. So, I basically like them both for different reasons. The choice as to which one gets the nod is really tough.
Erich

I see your point Erich but for me the blur makes the shot more realistic and hence understandable. Without it there's certainly a touch of 'what the heck....'