I do prefer this pic to the other jay shots aesthetically, but I do have to
agree that the softness goes beyond motion blur. You might be able to tweak it
a bit with some more unsharp mask, but it will probably never look critically
sharp.
On Sep 19, 2011, at 4:08 PM, Ken Waller wrote:
> I agree with doug's comments.
>
> Kenneth Waller
> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
>
> - Original Message - From: "Doug Brewer"
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 12:52 PM
> Subject: Re: Question for Mark, Doug, William and anyone else that has
> judgeda photo contest
>
>
>> On 9/19/11 10:08 AM, David J Brooks wrote:
>>> http://www.caughtinmotion.com/2011-markhamfair/album/index.html
>>>
>>> In my markham fair post, i mentioned that one of the jays shots, 6037,
>>> the landing one, is a bit soft, Paul calls in motion blur.:-) This is
>>> the one i like for the wild bird class, but am bothered by this bit of
>>> softness, which does not really show up at web sizes so i just noticed
>>> it when i printed it out.
>>>
>>> Question to the judges on the list, would this be a deal breaker or
>>> not. The concept of the photo is jays in flight, but would the
>>> softness or motion blur be enough to say, "nope, try again next year
>>> Brooksie". My other choices are #'s 6034 and 6057 in the above link.
>>>
>>> Thoughts???
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>
>> yeah, the issue is that when we look at a photo we look for the thing in
>> focus and think that is the subject. In the shot in question, by this logic,
>> the peanuts on the bench appear to be the subject. If the Jay was the only
>> thing in the photo, I could maybe grant a little wiggle room on the focus,
>> but then the problem might be someone else delivering a shot where the bird
>> was in perfect focus, and I'd go with that one. Not knowing the relative
>> quality of the typical Markham Fair submissions, though, I would be hard for
>> me to make that call.
>>
>> The short answer would then be, as always, "it depends."
>>
>> If it were my shot, I'd probably wait for next year, but I'm way too
>> critical of my own work.
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
> the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
