On Request of Fellow Member

D'Buggs

For those interested, the outcome of this image was seriously thought-out and intended. The debate is; does it work?




You tell me.... :huh

TonyCooper

I've been back to this three times thinking that I'll see what was intended. I can't. I can see liking a photo even if there's camera shake or it's a bit out-of-focus, but I can't figure out what was deliberately done for effect.

phillybikeboy

No.

thoth

As I was that fellow member I say yes. I am very glad for two things: you cropped tighter and you ditched the explanation. Both go a long way towards making this a nice shot.

Roadkill

I find the effect interesting... selective camera shake?

bdcolen

D'Buggs wrote:

For those interested, the outcome of this image was seriously thought-out and intended. The debate is; does it work?




You tell me....

Well, I definitely want to know how you did it! (fill-flash to freeze him, but intentional camera shake over all?) And I'm intrigued by it. But I'm afraid that there isn't much here - guy by side of Shakey Street Staring At Camera. So what was your intent? (Oh, if this was shot during an earthquake it REALLY works!

D'Buggs

The "piece" is intended as a documentary, of sorts. What I did here, was an effort of capturing the scene/activity as if being looked through the eyes of the subject - Understanding, that, one would either, a; need to know him or, b; be willing read a follow up story.

So I guess, is the image enough to *intrigue* a person, to be willing to read the story and 'get to know him'?


As for how it was created; I planned the shot around the persons daily activity and 'predicted' the shot. While using a 50mil lens, I had the ap @ 1.8 and slowed the shutter to 1/15 sec. What led to the slight isolating of the subject came from shooting a "string" of single shots, until I had one that conveyed subject movement (horizontal; walking) but also coincided with the rise and fall of the person (vertical bg movement), with the shake of camera from releasing the shutter.... 1.8 would yield the best focus on the subject yet also deliver a blurry bokeh, which when enhance from the slow shutter speed, wouldn't have that 'bokeh' feel. No flash was used.


I sincerely appreciate the feedback from all that have....

bdcolen

D'Buggs wrote:

The "piece" is intended as a documentary, of sorts. What I did here, was an effort of capturing the scene/activity as if being looked through the eyes of the subject - Understanding, that, one would either, a; need to know him or, b; be willing read a follow up story.

So I guess, is the image enough to *intrigue* a person, to be willing to read the story and 'get to know him'?


As for how it was created; I planned the shot around the persons daily activity and 'predicted' the shot. While using a 50mil lens, I had the ap @ 1.8 and slowed the shutter to 1/15 sec. What led to the slight isolating of the subject came from shooting a "string" of single shots, until I had one that conveyed subject movement (horizontal; walking) but also coincided with the rise and fall of the person (vertical bg movement), with the shake of camera from releasing the shutter.... 1.8 would yield the best focus on the subject yet also deliver a blurry bokeh, which when enhance from the slow shutter speed, wouldn't have that 'bokeh' feel. No flash was used.


I sincerely appreciate the feedback from all that have....

Welllll...First off, my hat is off to you - seriously! - for thinking this through as you did. And perhaps it would work with text. But alone, I don't think it does...work...unfortunately. But damn, you really plotted this out. And I have to say that what you're trying here is close in concept to what one of my MIT students is going to do for her project - she's following a blind person for a day. One of the ideas I through out to her was trying to figure out if she could somehow photograph what the blind person "sees."

D'Buggs

bdcolen wrote:

Welllll...First off, my hat is off to you - seriously! - for thinking this through as you did. And perhaps it would work with text. But alone, I don't think it does...work...unfortunately.

Thanks for the grade on effort.

And as for it not being a 'stand alone' photo, I whole-heartedly agree - Unless you're someone that's "in the loop" (targeted audience), it IS a little confusing to look at.


I don't think it's "unfortunate" - I'm really,,, really, OK with it needing a story.