Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Photo Critiques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 14, 2011, 9:38 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 72
Default SwimStart

Swim start Blur dont give idea of motion ?
Attached Images
 
Lionsitaly is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 14, 2011, 10:44 AM   #2
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

No, I don't really get the idea of motion from this treatment. In general the idea would be to have an in-focus subject and blurred background. But specifically, a swimmer off the block isn't really moving that fast so a lot of background blur would look strange anyway. I'll be interested to see what others think, but the treatment doesn't work for me.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 14, 2011, 12:01 PM   #3
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

It doesn't work for me either.

If at least part of the subject was sharp, then it might work. For example, I've seen some nice photos of action captured by carefully panning with a subject to keep the subject in the same place in the frame, even though the subject may have some parts that are blurry, with the blurry parts giving a greater feel of motion. For example, a runner with blurry arms and legs that still has a sharp torso.

But, given your shutter speed of 1/13 second with a focal length of 300mm, that would be pretty tough to accomplish (getting any part of an image sharp in that lighting with your lens and camera settings, thanks to both blur from camera shake and blur from subject movement).

I'd get a brighter lens and shoot at higher ISO speeds and wider apertures for best results with that type of shot. 1/13 second with a 300mm lens at f/6.3 and ISO 400 is just not going to work (from my perspective) for that type of subject in that lighting.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 14, 2011, 12:48 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,093
Default

I kind of like it. It reminds me of that 1970s Sports Illustrated artist's work.
tclune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2011, 4:56 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
ItDontMeanAThing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Hua Hin, Thailand
Posts: 403
Default

It does not say 'motion' to me. Instead I see an impression of a swim start. That's intended as a compliment because I like impressionism and I like fresh takes on familiar subjects. Swim starts are usually either shot with crystal clarity that freezes the motion, or as a pan that creates background blur. I like the effect created, but not the composition because the swimmer's lower body is not shown and the background is cluttered. Including the lower body or simplifying the background (or both) would improve the composition IMHO.
ItDontMeanAThing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2011, 8:14 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
JustinThyme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 361
Default

I dont get motion out of it, much Like John said an in focus subject and blurred background is what works for that like a panning shot of a cyclist. To me this says abstract art.
JustinThyme is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:03 PM.