[PJ] Out Of Focus Elements

RyanS

A post for the PJs out there...

These are some examples of how to make your photo editor angry. Yes, the usual focus in this forum is ultra-high quality results. However, I thought I'd share some of my mistakes. Perhaps you'll learn from them like I have. The lesson here is pay attention to the backgrounds, edges, and out of focus elements. Try, for the time being, to not get too hung up on overall composition. I know these aren't the strongest. Main point I'm trying to make is about the elements in a photo that don't fit. Details are really important because you're going to lock them in place forever. The maxim I learned from this assignment: "Think it before you click it."

I'll include the better selects below. However, I'm not ashamed to admit that I often produce less than stellar results. As long as I can learn from them, I feel that is positive.

1. She sees me, but I didn't see her.


2. Avoid out of context background text like the plauge. Didn't see it. This event was about as far away from "loving nerds" as you can imagine.


3. Behaviors that may be considered distracting are quite off-limits. Didn't see it.


4. Another example of a distracting behavior. I was totally unaware.


5. The lady with the eye patch isn't contributing to the story. I'm sure she has an interesting story, but it is out of context. Easily cropped out, but I was totally unaware of it while shooting. That's the bad part.

---

And a few examples that got selected by the editor. These are straight dumps from the camera with no correction, so please ignore the post work... there isn't any.

6.


7.


8.


9.


10.

TonyCooper

Quite frankly, your point eludes me. Without knowing what this event was all about,
I have trouble understanding what the problems are.

I see the lady pointing in your direction in #1, but I don't see how that presents a problem.
I don't see what is so distracting about the background, but the lady with the eyepatch
does become a - possibly - distracting subtext. The reference to "loving nerds" escapes
me. The male is a bit nerdy looking, but school functions are not expected to be nerd-free.

The nose-picking and cup-held-by-suction are a bit out-of-place, but surely you would have
a selection of crowd shots to choose from. The second appearance of eye-patch lady is, as
you say, easily cropped, but why? If the intent was to capture the crowd, then why is
an eye-patch-wearing lady inappropriate? Would an arm cast or a crutch-wielder also be
sanitized out of the picture?

I'm sure you have a valid point, but I don't feel you've conveyed it here. I think you need
to give a reason that these elements are a problem to make that point.

RyanS

Good points Tony. Let me try to clarify why I feel these were issues.

1. Just a terrible shot in general, but that's not the point. If a subject or element in the photograph is acknowledging the photographer in a visually recognizable way, that can break the rhythm of a story. The photographer isn't the story, unless he or she is. In or out. I didn't realize I was being pointed at. And that's the point.

2. The context would be elusory as I didn't mention it. The context is a serious and somber panel discussion related to Iranian politics and religious discrimination. "I (heart) nerds." Didn't quite fit the headline, ya know? I wasn't rushed. I was staring at the scene. I wasn't paying attention to detail. That's the message.

3 & 4. Yes. you're right. This is a great reason to take several crowd shots. I did have others to choose from. The point I was trying to make is that I was totally unaware of these elements when taking the picture. I had tunnel vision and wasn't seeing what else might be going on in the frame. That's the point I was trying to make. Don't be like me. ;-) Pay attention to detail before pressing the release.

5. I was told that it wasn't so much that she was wearing an eye patch, but wearing a sort of ornately cut black eye patch. The style of eye patch was the issue because it was likely to distract the viewer. Another easy fix, but again, didn't see it. Wasn't even aware there was a woman with an eye patch in the image. I could have made it stronger all on my own, no editing required, had I seen it.

The message I want to convey isn't that there are distracting elements, it is that it is easy (for me any way) to overlook them when shooting an event. Maybe that is something that just I struggle with?

richardman

RyanS wrote: »

...

The message I want to convey isn't that there are distracting elements, it is that it is easy (for me any way) to overlook them when shooting an event. Maybe that is something that just I struggle with?

Ryan, this is an interesting exercise. This is part of the reasons to keep shooting the same scene. It's hard to detect all distractions consciously all the time, but your subconscious mind may see it. By working the scene, sometimes all the elements come together to give you a killer shot.

BTW, this is also the same reasons why sometimes winners can be found on the "contact sheet" unexpectedly. We may miss an expression or interaction that makes the picture.

Quincy T

Ryan, I really enjoyed this post. As someone who aspires to be in your position someday, it's good to see your reflections on mistakes. Thanks for posting this!

Richard

RyanS wrote: »

The message I want to convey isn't that there are distracting elements, it is that it is easy (for me any way) to overlook them when shooting an event. Maybe that is something that just I struggle with?

I'm quite sure you're not the only one. Human vision is a complex interaction of the eye and the brain and is optimized to allow you to concentrate on what is of the greatest importance in a scene, while ignoring the rest. As photographers, we have to unlearn (or at least suspend) this skill if we are to avoid unpleasant surprises.

Thanks for posting this--they say that we learn from our mistakes, but I always have found it more pleasant to learn from somebody else's. .

Moving Pictures

As a newspaper guy, we have a word for #10. It's called "executed at dawn."

Not dumping on you - just trying to re-inforce the points you are making. As a page designer, I'd point out the obvious from a photography point of view - tell me a story.

Your points are all valid, and I commend you on your self-evaluation. This thing appear to be a conference of some nature ... what, frankly, is irrelevant. This is one of those situations that call to mind one of my general group/crowd mantras inhereted from editors long ago: two or three is ideal, anything more than five will be lost. (Exception, maybe, is if you shot the class over the shoulder of the instructor, or had a wide DOF shot where you obtained the face of the instructor and the background crowd - hard to do in low-light, indoors...)

Very good points ... I might add a few of my own from 15 years in the newspaper biz ... but first, I gotta go shoot a buncha small, cute kids falling down frequently playing in a novice hockey jamboree.