What’s Your Preference?

matthewchj · #1 (**permalink**) 06-25-2007, 02:34 PM

wulf · #2 (**permalink**) 07-09-2007, 02:14 PM

It looks like it ought to be fun but the end result is rather drab and static. A wider aperture would have narrowed the depth of field and drawn attention away from the concrete of the background - even better, getting in closer would have taken more of that from the picture.

Also, a slower shutter speed might have helped catch the sense of motion, especially if the camera was stable so that the slide was not shaky, emphasising the girl's movement down across the frame (or, alternatively, panning to follow her - that might have been even better and also dealt with the background).

Wulf

ELAY · #3 (**permalink**) 07-09-2007, 08:27 PM

I might try to suggest that your model look upward at you -- her eyes would give you more focus.

EL

clockdoc · #4 (**permalink**) 07-09-2007, 08:42 PM

Tried some "blur" filters in PS 7.0. The first is a Motion Blur

And here's one with the Radial Blur filter applied.

Sime · #5 (**permalink**) 07-09-2007, 08:46 PM

That bit of blur livens it up a bit, but I think the background kills it for me, like Wulf said... maybe a tighter crop? but then you lose too much slide... hmmm...

wulf · #6 (**permalink**) 07-10-2007, 09:25 AM

I have done a simulated panning effect (separating the girl from the background and applying different levels of motion blur to each); real panning and, as Elay suggested, having the girl look up, would be better.

Wulf

matthewchj · #7 (**permalink**) 07-10-2007, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ELAY

I might try to suggest that your model look upward at you -- her eyes would give you more focus.

Model? What model?

This was a candid shot.

Thanks for the comments and input, guys. Now that you've pointed it out and shown me examples, I have to agree with you that it looks frozen, and the motion blur looks much nicer.

Thanks, guys!