Pic: tell me what ya think bout this pic...

[drg]

For me, this falls just on the "doesn't work" edge of the "works/doesn't work" line. It's a pity, it would be a nice pic if it were just a tad more in-focus. It's just too close to being in focus, that the details being blurry bother me.

It might be able to be saved by turning it into a photo illustration with a heavy dose of sharpening and posterization or something.

The contrast doesn't bother me, and that can always be worked on in post.

But don't listen to me or anyone else ... if you like it, it's a keeper!

[noodles]

...

Three words. Fill In Flash

It'll help with the contrast as it will give a bit more to the subject and it wil take out some of the blur which appears to be caused by too slow a shutter speed rather than being out of focus. If you have photoshop play around with an unsharp mask to try and remove the blur and use the curves option to improve your brightness, contrast and colours.

[The Action Figure]

Id like it better in focus

[DaveSM]

I think the picture is just fine that way. It's a bit blurred and it gives an effect of motion. Just like this guy was getting hsi marker up or snap-shoot. Pictures don't need to be clear all the time. In my photography class I took many still pictures but nearly as many blurred ones with parts of the picture out of focus and others in focus. Keep this picture like it, maybe a few will not like it but many will do.

My two canadians cents.

This picture just as this would be great as a background for desktop.

[FSU_Paintball]

In focus would be nice, but what I think is really missing is the front of the barrel. I'd really like to see that.

[Snowball]

that would be sweet as a walpaper or some sort of banner..

[Muzikman]

Perosnally, I think photos should be in focus and object motion should be used with caution. Camera shake should be eliminated totally.

If you want a similar effect but ultimatly a better photo use a flash but still a slower shutter speed. What this will do is when the flash goes off it will capture a frozen image of the subject, but with the longer shutter it will cause a blur as the subject moves. You still have to make sure you prevent camera shake though which is the hard part.

[OmniM]

hey... cool comments everyone!

And of course, some like and some arent. :)

This one is taken with a Nikkor 70-200/2,8 VR lens so there arent any blurness due to camshake. It was taken when tha player was popping :)

I aslo wanna have all pics in perfect focus, but this one just grabbed me for some reason. We will use it as a banner/poster for the upcomin Nordic3-series. I will just adjust the colors in it.

/OmniM

[Muzikman]

Seeing as it was 1/15 second sutter speed, I am sure there is some camera shake in there because even with VR (or IS as Canon likes to call it) that is way to slow to hand hold without shake. Looking at it, it would be hard to tell what is shake and what is not as there is no stationary objects in the photo. This is actually a good thing. The use of the DoF is really good, as the best photos are the ones that draw your attention to the subject.

Nice lens btw, I got the Canon version of the same lens.

[Muzikman]

Also, just curious, what ISO were you shooting at. The EXIF data doesn't say.

[VFX_Fenix]

Some people kill hours and hours on photos to get that motion blur effect. I say if you captured it with your good ol' camera, then kudos! Unless you WANTED the photo to be in crisp focus... then... well... you know...

All in all it's an excelent example of a Depth of Field/Motion Blur photo. Considering the image was taken during a game (I assume) the composition of the picture isn't all that bad either, though it might have been better if the player were facing the center of the shot rather than the right edge, but hey... Can't have everything, can we?

[OmniM]

Also, just curious, what ISO were you shooting at. The EXIF data doesn't say.

Some camshake sure... but not so it would be dramatic, the VR and IS (i think) does its work very very good :)

I think I shot it with ISO 400, forgot to set it higher

[Muzikman]

Some people kill hours and hours on photos to get that motion blur effect. I say if you captured it with your good ol' camera, then kudos! Unless you WANTED the photo to be in crisp focus... then... well... you know...

All in all it's an excelent example of a Depth of Field/Motion Blur photo. Considering the image was taken during a game (I assume) the composition of the picture isn't all that bad either, though it might have been better if the player were facing the center of the shot rather than the right edge, but hey... Can't have everything, can we?

Well, see, this I would disagree with. That is NOT a good example of "Motion Blur" or even DoF. If I was teaching someone the technique of blurring an object in motion that would not be a photo I would show them as an example. The reason is, it does not show the direction of motion. It would be hard to tell if this is blur because of movement or because of camera shake.

The only reason I say it's not a good example of DoF is because the subject is so blurred that it's hard to show someone who doesn't understand DoF what you are trying to accomplish.

[VFX_Fenix]

Well, portions of the subject are in focus, the focal plane is on the hands or just infront of them, however the subject is significantly more in focus than the back ground which suits DoF for me. The difference between camera shake and motion blur is, in my opinion nit picky for this subject. I believe there's enough that's static in the background to illustrate that the camera is indeed stationary and the subject is moving. You'll also notice that the shoulders don't display the streaking motion that the hands, gun, hopper, and mask do with a definate diagonal direction from bottom left to top right.

Admittedly this isn't a text-book dramatic example of MB/DoF that would be used for teaching, however I still feel it's an excelent example of both in an impromptive setting. If I were teaching I'd use a photo which demonstrated either effect independently rather than in the same picture.

[Army]

Personally, I like it enough that despite not being a 'Mag, I made it my background pic!