New photo project/assignment

[Elizabeth]

From Billy:

I have an idea for the next assignment, but instead if you don't mind I'd like to nominate you to come up with the next assignment.

Billy has challenged me to come up with another photo project/assignment. I was thinking perhaps a freeze-action shot. In other words, a photo of something moving, where you have captured a moment in time, as focused as you can make it, without any blur. Examples might be: a bird in flight, a kid on a rope swing, or one of those cool macros of something splashing into a glass of milk. It wouldn't count if you can't tell the thing is moving (for example a photo of a car where it isn't clear whether it is parked or not).

My example is as follows:

It breaks the rule of not having your subject moving out of the frame with no space in front; but that is just the kind of dog Gracie is. She is perpetually zooming off who-knows-where at the edge of my vision.

Does this interest anyone?

 

[MichaelJ]

Do you just mean motion blur is forbidden? In other words, don't let the stream blur into a veil of water, but depth-of-field blur is okay?

I know I should go shoot a new one for this assignment, but I can't help but to contribute this classic from last summer of Terra playing at the park:

 

[Elizabeth]

Do you just mean motion blur is forbidden? In other words, don't let the stream blur into a veil of water, but depth-of-field blur is okay?

Yes, that is what I meant. I was distinguishing between a freeze action and a panning or intentional blurring photo. Great shot of Terra. (I also intend to do a new one for the "assignment.")

 

[JohnL]

I think this meets the criteria:

JohnL

 

[nartreb]

There's actually a tiny bit of blur on Osoro's right hand here:



If you average it with this one, is it OK?

 

[Quietman]

Here is mine. Not on a hiking trip, but a very short walk to get there. I wont post the location, sure that some know, PM me if you are curious. Didn't quite freeze the spray at the bottom of the falls, but I like it.

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[Grumpy]

My contribution: Sandhill Cranes take flight.

[URL=http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/2046391910106563395huGGbu] [/URL]

Almost stopped the motion of the wings completely at shutter speed of approx 1/1000 second.

G.

 

[Elizabeth]

Almost stopped the motion of the wings completely at shutter speed of approx 1/1000 second.

G.

Terrific photo of the sandhill cranes. Also, thanks for sharing the shutter speed. In the spirit of these exercises being learning experiences, I should have asked everyone to tell us the shutter speeds of your photos. For mine of Gracie, the evening light was low, so I couldn't speed it up too much. I used a shutter speed of 1/640 second and set the exposure compensation to -0.3.

Some great photos so far. I especially like the one from John L. of the hiker jumping the brook. In the photo it looks like he is about to get very wet.

From Nartreb:

There's actually a tiny bit of blur on Osoro's right hand here:

I'd say the blur is minimal enough to count. Great capture!

For Quietman's photo, I feel like the girl in the red bathingsuit acts as a good balance point in the composition, and her response to the jumper really adds to the drama of the scene.

 

[Billy]

Thunder Hole, Acadia National Park, Maine
1/800, f/9.0, ISO 400, FL 31mm (50mm EQ)
Sometimes they close the viewing platform.
pic here



From very top row of Garden last year.
1/250, f/5.6, ISO 400, FL 300mm (480mm EQ)
pic here

 

[JohnL]

Thanks for the nice comment, Elizabeth. The hiker, Jack, was afraid that he would get very wet and very cold since the runoff stream was all glacial melt-water. He must have stood there for five minutes before he jumped and I had my eye to the viewfinder the whole time. The rock he was reaching for was under two to three inches of rushing water and he was not sure if it was stable or slippery. I told him there was one way to find out. He said I was making him nervous. I said I’ll have a great shot that he can hang on his wall. It is one of my favorite images. Other than a bit of water rushing over his boot, he stayed high and dry.

Here’s another shot I found for this thread. The thing I like about it is that of all of the hoofs on the five horses (yes, there are three horses in the front group) only two of the twenty hoofs are touching the ground.

JohnL

 

[Lou Hale]

probably to much blur to count but she was running full out

 

[Lou Hale]

These two may be a little better

This little boy never stops, honestly he was moving at the time

 

[Tom Rankin]

He's ugly, but he's frozen!

 

[Grumpy]

Looking through these photos, I see several that (for me) “work” pretty well. They are:

Post #1 – Dog photo by Elizabeth

Post #2 – Dog photo by Michael J

Post #11 – Dog photo by Lou Hale

Post #13 – Soaring bird photo by Tom Rankin

What these all have in common is that the subjects are well separated and stand out crisply from their backgrounds. This makes the images much more graphic and simplifies things for the viewer. We used to call this a form of “posterization,” although that term these days more likely conjures up a mind’s eye image of something heavily “post processed,” to high contrast and with altered colors, and so on.

Of the pix listed above, I most like the one in Post #1, by Elizabeth. Not only does the dog stand out nicely from the plain background of the water, but the action clearly is dynamic, the timing excellent, and the angle of view (relatively low, with the dog obviously quite close to the camera) is somewhat startling. The sense of diagonal movement lends an extra feeling of dynamic action. Best of all, this photo departs very successfully from the “rules” of composition, which usually dictate that the subject should be moving (and thereby taking the viewer’s gaze) into rather than out of the frame. It is this last thing that makes the photo so instantly engaging, in my opinion. Once engaged, we can see and enjoy the other fine qualities of a photographic image that qualifies as a picture.

I note, also, that several posters have mentioned the fact that action in their photos may not have been completely “stopped” or “frozen,” as if, perhaps, that is something of a defect. I don’t see it that way. A touch of blur in an otherwise “frozen” moment of action reinforces the idea that we, indeed, are looking at a very lively and dynamic subject. Sometimes stopping things cold in every detail does them a disservice.

G.

 

[Paul_Bear]

Another bird in flight ... pelican in Yellowstone National Park. My first experience using auto-focus on a moving subject ... MUCH easier than manual focus!

f/5.6
1/1250

 

[Grumpy]

Paul Bear: Boffo! And a great job of posterization, too.

Long suspicious of automation, I have come to hugely appreciate the autofoucus and autoexposure features on today's cameras. They make life a lot easier for photographers.

G.

 

[Tom Rankin]

My contribution: ...
G.

All you had to do was say 'Look at my avatar'!

 

[Grumpy]

All you had to do was say 'Look at my avatar'!

My avatar photo of the bald eagle has a little story to go with it.

Mrs. Grumpy and I first spotted the bird feeding on the carcass of a road-killed deer. We slowed our vehicle but as we approached the bird flew, then quickly perched in a roadside tree overlooking the defunct deer. Then it launched again toward the carcass, to give me this shot.

The photo was shot through the vehicle windshield, using a 28-70mm zoom lens on a Nikon digital SLR camera body -- not great conditions or gear setup for this kind of thing. Additionally, the autoexposure system left the bird underexposed against a bright sky. Heavy cropping was needed to make the composition, and plenty of Photoshop post-processing was needed to correct color and tonal values.

What resulted was a reasonable image for something small like the avatar, but not of sufficient quality to use for a larger print, in my opinion. But I do think the "moment" was right, and the whole live scene was a thrill in itself.

To, I like your photo of the soaring bird (raven? crow? vulture?) above the developed background landscape. It reminds us that wild things exist even in civilized settings.

G.

 

[Tom Rankin]

To, I like your photo of the soaring bird (raven? crow? vulture?) above the developed background landscape. It reminds us that wild things exist even in civilized settings.

Some kind of vulture, shot in Rio a few years ago. People live on what look like ridiculously steep cliffs until they just can't go any higher.

 

[blaze]

From a backpack to Cutler, Maine ("The Bold Coast"), May 2009.