I would love to get some feedback on this photo. I really wanted to submit this for the macro challenge, but I think I'm too thin-skinned to bear the feedback I would expect from this photo.
Well I don't blame you! While personally I find the motion blur to be rather interesting, it certainly would get torn apart. People tend to vote first by image quality and clarity, then by artistic value. Unfortunately, this one falls into the 2nd category!
I a contemporary photography contest this picture would have many competitive qualities. In this present environment, you could have been a serious contender to join the ever select "Last Place Club"
I agree with the 2 commenters below, that the picture would not have done well in the macro challenge, and I don't blame anyone for not wanting to get a bunch of negative comments.
As a picture, I think it has interesting qualities, it's a good exploration. But, IMHO, the plural title, "Impressions", more or less tells what might not quite be working with it, at least for me - it's more than one impression. Again IMHO, for a picture like this one to work it would have to be clearer (not sharper) in its intention, its purpose. But that's just my opinion. Take care,
I know I'm going out on a limb here, but I'll be the one to say - Hey John, this pitcher's all fuzzy. Colors are great, composition is fantastic, and I even like that the flower (I think that's what it is???) only has a few sporatic petals (it looks like that, anyway). But, the fuzzy effect doesn't look like motion blur to me, and it makes it hard to tell what it even is.
I know, people are going to say "You don't appreciate real art," but I just don't like it. In focus, this would be a fantastic shot.
I'll now put up my "IMHO" shield, because it protects me from being drawn and quartered for saying this: IMHO.
This was an 'accidental' photo to start with. It is out of focus and it does have motion blur as well. It's just one of those accidents where I liked the result. "Impressions" is not really supposed to be about the subject(s) of this photo... I thought the image had an 'impressionistic' feel to it...
As an individual study (as opposed to one of a series), what is lacking, IMO, is an anchor to have at least one focused element in the shot, as a kind of reference for one and to emphasize the blur as well.
I don't, for the most part, use or even like borders at all, especially not ostentatious ones, but it seems telling that you chose to use one here, hairline and in colour. Still, I'd prefer to find what the border provides within the picture itself, really.
As part of a series, the intent (a sense of study?) would, I believe, invite a viewer not to (naturally) apply the same criterium or, at least, not to the same extent?
As an individual study (as opposed to one of a series), what is lacking, IMO, is an anchor to have at least one focused element in the shot, as a kind of reference for one and to emphasize the blur as well.
I don't, for the most part, use or even like borders at all, especially not ostentatious ones, but it seems telling that you chose to use one here, hairline and in colour. Still, I'd prefer to find what the border provides within the picture itself, really.
As part of a series, the intent (a sense of study?) would, I believe, invite a viewer not to (naturally) apply the same criterium or, at least, not to the same extent?
I have no clue :) I know that this shot would not be well received by a lot of people and that's exactly what I would expect from it. It's just one of those accidental shots where *I* like the results :)
This was an 'accidental' photo to start with. It is out of focus and it does have motion blur as well. It's just one of those accidents where I liked the result. "Impressions" is not really supposed to be about the subject(s) of this photo... I thought the image had an 'impressionistic' feel to it...
I think you conveyed the 'impressionistic' feel pretty well, and I might have used that form of the word as the title.
If the blurring of the flowers (the little ones in the center) were just OOF instead of being blurred by motion the effect would be even stronger; basically having the front sepals ("petals") in focus, forming a "bridge" to lead the eye into the progressively more OOF background.
Given the known "imperfections" I would also probably use an image like this as a base for some Photoshop experimentation with filters or color-shifting to see if I could disguise or de-emphasize the motion blur.
I'll never be worried if I'm ever becalmed while sailing, because pressing the Macro button on my camera is guaranteed to bring up a breeze ....
This is also a great example of why I "never" discard any frames on the camera. At a cost of about 1/10 cent/ea to preserve on CD, I save them all, since I know I may "see" them differently at another time.
I think your shot 'accidentally' captures the essence of a bee visiting a flower quite nicely. Yes, I think it would have suffered in a challenge but ribbons aren't everything (at least that's what I tell myself!).
Yours is more dynamic than this shot of mine, for example - so I don't think that a pin sharp image is necessarily always a better shot:
Okay, I can't help my sorry self - I've yet to have anything decent ready for a challenge, so I'm gonna cheapen myself by spashing this image into the forum
Accepting the blur, which I can see could work, I'd like to see the colors of at least the flower, if not the bee, pop out a little more. I don't think I'd be able to achieve it given my lack of editing ability, but like Paul suggested, some work with the colors and/or some filters might help.
Or at least I sure would have if I'd only known how to insert a thumbnail!
It looks like you are trying to link to the file on your local drive (Drive U). The file has to be on a disk whose complete URL is known to the internets DNS servers. If you have a static IP address from your ISP you can insert that in the pathname (a rare situation). Otherwise you have to upload the file to a server on the net; either here at DPC (into your Portfolio) or to another service like //pBase.com
spice if up in an image editor
give it a painted feel - impressionism
i'm as much a fan of altered photos as i am of straight unedited ones
you might be able to tell by my camera - i take many shots that dont pass muster as straight photos, but can be turned into quite nice things with photoshop.
my profile has a some examples - if you interested in pushing the limits of a photo
of course i cant do many of the things in entries for this site - but
I want to preface this by saying I like effective blurry shots. However, when you remove the sharp focus of a normal photograph, or use slower shutter speeds, you end up with something that must stand on the impression created. The shot then comes down to tonal relationships, implied action and colours.
I think this shot is let down by the tones and colours which are in turn underexposed and unpleasant. The drab yellowy green really doesn't appeal to me at all and the background is similarly grey and blotchy. Perhaps removing the colour or shifting the hue significantly while improving the exposure might help, but I'm not convinced.
The shot does perhaps capture the essence of a bee, but doesn't appeal to me enough to make me want to linger.
Edit: After re-reading this I expect a follow-up post of 'but tell us what you really think' but I figure John is robust enough to take it.
