It is with great hesitation that I post this image. I attempt this type of photography after reading an article by Stephen Lang in OP. I have never done this stuff before so I would be interested in any and all comments. I feel, if done right, it can be very effective and beautiful. I also feel that if the image doesn't have one point of sharp focus it can be difficult to view., but I'm not sure if I am right about this.
Joe:
Always good to try new things. I glanced at that same article, and have done a fair amount of flash blurs while in Florida at the Venice Rookery, and such.
Just for me personally, most of my blur efforts don't work, but occasionally you get one that is effective.
I do agree, that at least for me, I want one relatively sharp area as an anchor. I also find that they tend to be more effective with masses of birds, rather than solos.
Your image implies motion/activity to me. It is well exposed. I will be curious to have others chime in!
I think blurs are fun, I'm experimenting myself these day,
posted one yesterday. This one looks fine, with a flash I think
it is important to use slow/rear curtain to have the object
in front of the "ghost" in the direction of motion.
In the 90s there were plenty of these kind on blurs in
NG and other magazines. They can indeed be very effective.
I think you have the right amount of effective blur here. I do see some "solid" lines, and the feet are crisp. But just like a "regular" image I do wish for a better HA, and think it could support some more contrast (or at least darker blacks). Overall a valiant effort.
I like what you tried to accomplish here. Could have been working on these with all the lousy weather we have had. I wish for a tad more space on the bottom and have to agree on preferring not to see the bird's head turned away. Do very much like the motion generated by this blur.
Avian Blur
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
