Rockin' On Down

black mamba

There's so much technically off-base with this shot that I wouuldn't know where to start C&C on it myself. But, darn, I ilke it. It's some friends of mine performing at an open-air bar in St.Augustine, FL.

Tom

Richard

Well yeah, it does have its technical issues, Tom, but hey that doesn't matter among friends. Unless you're trying to be ironic, I think I would crop out the seated guy on the left. His static posture doesn't go with the motion that the blur conveys.

black mamba

This shot was an absolute throw-away. In fact, out of 31 exposures, I only had two shots that were really satisfying. I hadn't planned on shooting the group. There was very poor light, I had a slow lens, and only the pitiful on-camera flash to use....where was the SB-800 when I needed it? Just before hitting the " delete " button, I took a last look at this image and decided there were aspects to it that I did like.....mostly the really blurred image of the guy on the right.

Who better to turn to, I thought, than this group over in " streets " to get an opinion as to whether the shot is total garbage or does it have redeeming qualities.

I initially agreed with you, Richard, about cropping out the guy on the far left. Then I concluded he was a good counter-point to the movement of the performing group. Your position is probably the correct one, though.

Tom

lizzard_nyc

Hi Tom,
If you like it and they are friends then it's a keeper.
I know all about slow lenses in low light (glad I don't have to deal with that as much anymore).

I know you don't post here often so I want to encourage you, but, there's just too much technically wrong with it for me, though I get where you are coming from with the one guys major blurr.

FWIW, I myself have fallen in love with some of my shots which are seriously technically lacking--one immediately comes to mind, it's one of my favorites of all time, yet it got pretty trashed here. the opinions were correct, but it doesn't stop me from loving that shot. Go figure.

black mamba

lizzard_nyc wrote: »

Hi Tom,
If you like it and they are friends then it's a keeper.
I know all about slow lenses in low light (glad I don't have to deal with that as much anymore).

I know you don't post here often so I want to encourage you, but, there's just too much technically wrong with it for me, though I get where you are coming from with the one guys major blurr.

FWIW, I myself have fallen in love with some of my shots which are seriously technically lacking--one immediately comes to mind, it's one of my favorites of all time, yet it got pretty trashed here. the opinions were correct, but it doesn't stop me from loving that shot. Go figure.

I'm really happy to have you chime in on this one, Liz. And I couldn't agree with you more; the host of technical issues pretty much relegates this image to the trash pile.....as was my original intent. The group loved the two shots that I thought were OK, I wouldn't even show them this one.

I guess I was trying to determine if there's a situation wherein an otherwise poor shot can be " saved " by a redeeming element or two within the image. I figure that could be the case on a very limited basis but that this image lacks the " power " elements necessary to pull it off.

Puff. That's the sound of the delete button.

Tom