Great job, Alan! I love the way he's zooming into the frame, and particularly that the motion blur which adds so much to the image leaves just his face & fingers defined.
I'm curious whether this is the way the frame came out, or whether you needed to crop & manipulate the smear to get the final result. But you don't have to fess up... ;-)
Ha Chris, if I could plan in such a way that would be something. No, this was manipulated in PS.
TBH the original shot was sharp throughout but looked so static and thoroughly underwhelming. I wanted to experiment and see if I could give that sense of motion. This is created using 2 layers in PS - one sharp and a copy with motion blur applied.
The layers are then masked and blended. It's a bit rough as it was just a test, I may go back in and try again just to practice and hopefully improve my technique.
I'm sure this information devalues the perception of the image but in the sake of experimentation and creativity I think the technique does have its place if done well.
No, this information doesn't devalue the perception for me - it's the image that counts, Alan. It looks just like panning and motion blur. If it were more or less SOOC, that might suggest good timing & luck - and dozens of outtakes.
Thanks Chris, that’s my feeling also but I’ve often been hit with negative responses when I describe how work has been crafted.
I understand the sentiment somewhat- if an image evokes an emotional response on the assumption that it is SOOC and the viewer discovers to the contrary I can see how that may change that emotional connection.
Ha, who said I don't? Perhaps it really was a mucky thumbprint on the lens that created the blur.......much more impressive if you sound like you know your way around Photoship.
Great job, Alan! I love the way he's zooming into the frame, and particularly that the motion blur which adds so much to the image leaves just his face & fingers defined.
I'm curious whether this is the way the frame came out, or whether you needed to crop & manipulate the smear to get the final result. But you don't have to fess up... ;-)
Ha Chris, if I could plan in such a way that would be something. No, this was manipulated in PS.
TBH the original shot was sharp throughout but looked so static and thoroughly underwhelming. I wanted to experiment and see if I could give that sense of motion. This is created using 2 layers in PS - one sharp and a copy with motion blur applied.
The layers are then masked and blended. It's a bit rough as it was just a test, I may go back in and try again just to practice and hopefully improve my technique.
I'm sure this information devalues the perception of the image but in the sake of experimentation and creativity I think the technique does have its place if done well.
No, this information doesn't devalue the perception for me - it's the image that counts, Alan. It looks just like panning and motion blur. If it were more or less SOOC, that might suggest good timing & luck - and dozens of outtakes.
Thanks Chris, that’s my feeling also but I’ve often been hit with negative responses when I describe how work has been crafted.
I understand the sentiment somewhat- if an image evokes an emotional response on the assumption that it is SOOC and the viewer discovers to the contrary I can see how that may change that emotional connection.
Perhaps a discussion for another day…..
You can just lie, Alan! I do all the time. No, that's a lie. ;-|
Ha, who said I don't? Perhaps it really was a mucky thumbprint on the lens that created the blur.......much more impressive if you sound like you know your way around Photoship.