| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/20/2009 03:27:57 PM · #101 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by vawendy:
[quote=vawendy]If it's blurry, you really can't say it's in focus. |
Perhaps in some cases, but if the surrounding scene is focused, then it is clear that it is strictly motion blur. The challenge description is "Use an out of focused subject in a compelling way." Making motion blurred shot and just figuring people won't be able to tell, is not using the OOF trait in a compelling way.
 |
actually, the photo that I was contemplating was both out of focus and in motion. But after this conversation, I'm going to go shoot something else. I want the photo to be judged on its merits or lack thereof. I don't want to wonder whether the photo stinks or whether people think it didn't fit the challenge. So I'm willing to go with the flow, even when the flow is wrong :P
If I don't end up with something good, I'll enter the other shot just to have an entry.
I would love to get rid of titles everywhere! Both in challenges and for photos!! Death to titles! :D
|
|
|
|
09/20/2009 03:39:03 PM · #102 |
dang I know whats going to happen with my shot cos it is out of focus but as a thumbnail less folks are going to look at.
Mind you that could work two ways perhaps it may slip under the radar of the low score voters.... |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 03:49:03 PM · #103 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by BeefnCheez:
i think this one would score high in my opinion
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
 |
|
??? The focus wasn't missed here at all. I could see the microphone being the subject intentionally, and quite artistically at that. |
That's a matter of interpretation. Maybe the man is the subject and we just don't know it. I think people need to open their viewfinders on this one and let the image speak for itself. Don't get too hung up on rules, since this one is not stated in true black and white. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 04:10:51 PM · #104 |
Originally posted by Jutilda:
That's a matter of interpretation. Maybe the man is the subject and we just don't know it. I think people need to open their viewfinders on this one and let the image speak for itself. Don't get too hung up on rules, since this one is not stated in true black and white. |
OK, OK, I'll go with color! :D |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 04:14:26 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
actually, the photo that I was contemplating was both out of focus and in motion. |
Nothing wrong with that, but the use of the focus aspect is the point of the challenge. It is often possible to differentiate an in focus motion blur from an out of focus one. In my own shot above, the blur lines are fairly clean and sharp. I is in focus. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 04:15:55 PM · #106 |
| I think this one may be even more interesting that the HDR challenge. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 04:34:36 PM · #107 |
| What do you think about the use of software blur in this challenge - either to (de)augment existing lack of focus or by the liberal application of creative filters to all or part of the image? |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 04:41:09 PM · #108 |
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
What do you think about the use of software blur in this challenge - either to (de)augment existing lack of focus or by the liberal application of creative filters to all or part of the image? |
Its not something I would want to do. It kind of feels in the same league as adding artifacts to the picture. Though I struggle a lot introspectively with filters in general, after all they are only the software equivalent of dipping prints in and out of different chemicals.
And how about un-sharpen mask? If not blur why not un-sharpen mask etc. I think objectively though using software blur is a mechanism for losing information whilst other filter (like sharpening) use information in the picture to increase detail. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 08:59:10 PM · #109 |
I was thinking that no matter what is in focus is going to appear to be the subject, so unless most of the image is blurred, there will be those that will say "the subject isn't blurred." I am going to try and have a more open mind.
As mentioned earlier, I also realized that in advanced editing, you can do a duplicate layer and blur it, then erase back, so that might be the way people make a focused "subject" appear more blurred. I think I'm going to stay out of it, except as a voter. :~)
Message edited by author 2009-09-20 21:00:00. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 09:05:09 PM · #110 |
Originally posted by Jutilda:
I think I'm going to stay out of it, except as a voter. :~) |
Chicken!!!! (But probably a smart one) |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 10:28:38 PM · #111 |
as much as i'd love to enter a shot that i took this week of cars at the San Bernardino Route 66 Rendezvous, the blurriness is clearly a result of motion blur. i think even if many people are ok with it for this challenge, i think there are enough that will shoot it down for the motion blur.
sooo... i'm not going to enter one but rather i'd like to show them and would like to hear what anyone thinks of this type of shot. here are a few of my best from friday night. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 10:39:38 PM · #112 |
Originally posted by briantammy:
as much as i'd love to enter a shot that i took this week of cars at the San Bernardino Route 66 Rendezvous, the blurriness is clearly a result of motion blur. i think even if many people are ok with it for this challenge, i think there are enough that will shoot it down for the motion blur.
sooo... i'm not going to enter one but rather i'd like to show them and would like to hear what anyone thinks of this type of shot. here are a few of my best from friday night. |
they look out of focus to me! But I'm one of the ones that thinks oof includes blur :D
Luckily, I don't even have to consider the shot that I was worried about. I voted on HDR a few hours ago, and there was almost the same exact shot--more in focus, though. But way too similar to enter. (people would probably think it was the same person just entering a different edition of the same shot). I had 10 minutes to try to get something tonight, and I actually like 3 of the shots. I think I've decided on which one. I'm sure that people have done it much better, but it's fun to get a shot you like in a challenge topic with which you're so unfamiliar!
Message edited by author 2009-09-20 22:40:15. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 11:06:55 PM · #113 |
I'm in but do not expect much. The subject is not at all in focus, but the part that is will probably be accused of being the subject. I can see the comments regarding that now. Those who take the time to read the title may get it though.
|
|
|
|
09/20/2009 11:16:12 PM · #114 |
| I am nowhere near entering this one. :) |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 11:17:19 PM · #115 |
Originally posted by briantammy:
as much as i'd love to enter a shot that i took this week of cars at the San Bernardino Route 66 Rendezvous, the blurriness is clearly a result of motion blur. i think even if many people are ok with it for this challenge, i think there are enough that will shoot it down for the motion blur.
sooo... i'm not going to enter one but rather i'd like to show them and would like to hear what anyone thinks of this type of shot. here are a few of my best from friday night. |
Really great shots of those cars, Brian! |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 11:57:49 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
I am nowhere near entering this one. :) |
Decided to miss the fun? :)
|
|
|
|
07/24/2012 10:30:37 PM · #117 |
| Bring on another one of these please!!! |
|
|
|
07/25/2012 08:56:24 AM · #118 |
I wasn't a fan of this topic because half the entrants decided that motion blur was the same thing as missed focus. And most of the voters seemed to agree. I saw a lot of razor sharp, in-focus motion blur shots.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/30/2025 05:00:42 AM EDT.
