Perpetual Motion - Which & Why?

traunerk

A couple of slow shutter speed experiments taken very late in day.

Does anyone like either one? If so, why the preference...

Regards...Keith

PS...really do wish I had more time to post and comment, but work has been all consuming of late. Forgive me for not participating more often, but I am, after all, a happy hobbyist.

jwear

and good to boot

DavidTO

I like #2.

mercphoto

Number 2 has better positioning of arms, legs and head.

simon bennett

Hey Keith - your last name wouldn't happen to be [size=-1]Tiberius [/size]would it?

I prefer the second one. Why?

- Positioning gives room for movement. First shot has child at right of frame so there's nowhere to go.
- Head's down and there's more motion. The first looks like the run's finishing.
- B&W is cleaner for the shot. Colour in the first is an unnecessary distraction.

I'd also remove the title from inside the picture frame - but that's just me.

Nice shot, btw. Must be good to have a bundle-of-energy model to shoot.

Regards,
Simon.
_____________
I've openly replaced Starbucks with coffee.

Nikolai

#2

traunerk wrote:

A couple of slow shutter speed experiments taken very late in day.

Does anyone like either one? If so, why the preference...

Draws attention to the motion, not to the color.
#1 is kinda bland, just a blurred shot of a kid (sorry, you've asked "why" :-)
#2 is expressive, you can see this boy will never stop
Nice going!
Cheers!

JubbaKing

#2-shows more effort on the boy's part. The colors are too blue and cool in the first. I wish you were lower on both of them though.

traunerk

Thanks everyone...
who replied. I thought the bw was the better and am glad to see I have company.


Appreciate very much all the quick input...

Regards...Keith