Dogs Playing at the park: I took this at a local Dog Park. My question is whether having the Corgi slightly out of focus is ethnically pleasing.

Chefneil

I took this at a local Dog Park. My question is whether having the Corgi slightly out of focus is ethnically pleasing.

(Download)

par4fore Loc: Bay Shore N.Y.

First thing I noticed, so not for me.

Chefneil

par4fore wrote:

First thing I noticed, so not for me.

So why even bother with any reply?

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Chefneil wrote:

I took this at a local Dog Park. My question is whether having the Corgi slightly out of focus is ethnically pleasing.

Hi, chefneil,
Obvious focus problem aside, the major lesson here is to get the lens down at the level of the action rather than depend on a view "from the upper boxes"

Dave

Chefneil

Uuglypher wrote:

Hi, chefneil,
Obvious focus problem aside, the major lesson here is to get the lens down at the level of the action rather than depend on a view "from the upper boxes"

Dave

Thank you for your reasoned reply. Of couse getting to the level of the eyes is essential, but you merely implied a focus issue. My post questioned a specific question about the out of focus dog. What do you think about the motion implied by the blur?

par4fore Loc: Bay Shore N.Y.

Chefneil wrote:

So why even bother with any reply?

I'm sorry I thought you asked if "slightly out of focus is ethnically pleasing" I gave you my opinion "not for me". Please accept my sincere apologies for any misunderstanding and that my answer was not appreciated.

Chefneil

par4fore wrote:

I'm sorry I thought you asked if "slightly out of focus is ethnically pleasing" I gave you my opinion "not for me". Please accept my sincere apologies for any misunderstanding and that my answer was not appreciated.

Perhaps my understanding of your comment was not so good. I now understand what you meant. :lol:

I like that picture, expect for the fact that one of the dogs is totally out of focas. I was hoping that maybe I could make it into one of those artistic photos we see all the time. Your reply was honest and I appreciate it.

Happy Thanks Giving

olc

par4fore Loc: Bay Shore N.Y.

Chefneil wrote:

Perhaps my understanding of your comment was not so good. I now understand what you meant. :lol:

I like that picture, expect for the fact that one of the dogs is totally out of focas. I was hoping that maybe I could make it into one of those artistic photos we see all the time. Your reply was honest and I appreciate it.

Happy Thanks Giving

olc

Happy Thanksgiving to you.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

I don't understand what you mean by "ethnically", and how ethnic groups come into play here. Perhaps you mean "visually" pleasing?

Chefneil

rook2c4 wrote:

I don't understand what you mean by "ethnically", and how ethnic groups come into play here. Perhaps you mean "visually" pleasing?

Oops spell check needs spell check. Esthetically

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Chefneil wrote:

I took this at a local Dog Park. My question is whether having the Corgi slightly out of focus is ethnically pleasing.

No. I think it is an ethnic slur against Corgis. Actually I think the corgi is blurry because it was moving when you took the shot while the other dog was still. 1/100 sec is not really fast enough to freeze a moving dog. And you know how they jerk around when they are sparring. As to whether the picture is aesthetically pleasing; I would say that depends on how you plan to use it. The blurring of the Corgi does suggest movement and that is good, but there are a number of other distractions that would limit its use.
As a separate issue; this is not the normal place to ask questions about one specific aspect of a picture. This is where you post your best work to get considered critiques of your work. The best place to ask specific questions is in the "For Your Consideration" forum. There you will get thoughts and suggestions on the specific issue you want addressed.

Chefneil

mcveed wrote:

No. I think it is an ethnic slur against Corgis. ... (show quote)

I know this maybe a little snarky, but I thought I was asking for legitimate "Critique".

Graham Smith Loc: Cambridgeshire UK

Chefneil wrote:

I took this at a local Dog Park. My question is whether having the Corgi slightly out of focus is ethnically pleasing.

Hello Chefneil, you ask if the OOF dog is aesthetically pleasing. I'm afraid I have to say that it isn't. You have two main subjects, both of equal importance to the picture and it's story. Important subjects need to be in focus, not necessarily in critical focus, but acceptably so. Peripheral objects and people that are not part of the story can, in street type photography, and for arguments sake will will call this street type, be OOF, in fact it can be desirable as it lessens the impact of those undesirable distractions that exist on the street.

The blurring of the dog doesn't say movement to me, it says to me lack of DOF. Getting lower for shots like this has already been mentioned, I will add that you have cropped of the poor dogs tail which isn't at all aesthetically pleasing (I thought that docking of corgi's tails was banned)

This is my honest critique of your picture as I see it.

Graham

Chefneil

Graham Smith wrote:

Hello Chefneil, you ask if the OOF dog is aestheti... (show quote)

Thank you. This is the kind of critique I wanted! Also, I sorta leaned toward your thinking, but wanted to see what others, who know more than me, had to say.

As for the cropping of the dog's tail, I don't agree with it, but here in NC, I guess it is legal---unfortunately.

Graham Smith Loc: Cambridgeshire UK

Chefneil wrote:

Thank you. This is the kind of critique I wanted! Also, I sorta leaned toward your thinking, but wanted to see what others, who know more than me, had to say.

As for the cropping of the dog's tail, I don't agree with it, but here in NC, I guess it is legal---unfortunately.

I had meant that you had cropped off the dogs rear end with your framing then added the comment about the docking of tails :-)