Hey, Pat,

Thanks for all your comments.  I can't disagree with any of them.  I think I was
panning at an angle, because she was so short, and I only noticed her at the
last minute as she walked by, so the camera was travelling right to left to
follow her, but down a bit, to get her framed.  But, you're right about the fact
that horizontal "blur lines" would have been better (or at least different).  It
was the down movement of the camera that probably put her less sharp than she
could have been.

I have to admit, when I took the shot, I'd hoped for her to be sharper, but once
I saw it, the fact that she was blurred appealed to me somewhat.  But, that's
taste.  Makes her more dream-like, almost an apparition (she ~was~ very pretty
in real life - that's why I snapped <g>).

All I was looking for here was some reassurance, and you more than gave me that
when you said "overall I like the shot".  And, your criticisms are all more than
well-accepted.  And, I know you like pretty Asian girls (I've seen some of your
model shots) <vbg>.

thanks,
frank

Pat White wrote:

> Well, Frank, if it was taken by H C-B or another famous shooter, it'd be
> called really good.  However, you asked for opinions, so here's mine.  I
> like the composition and the feel of action, but the subject is a little
> _too_ blurred for my taste.  If you'd panned more, the background would be
> an unrecognizable blur.  On the other hand, if you'd used a higher shutter
> speed, just one or two steps, I think it would have been a really good shot
> .
>
> As well, the fact that the blurring is on an angle suggests that you weren't
> panning along with the subject, unless she was going up an escalator.
> Usually, this amount of blur is associated with fast action, not someone out
> for a walk, so it's a little discordant.  Overall, I like the shot, but
> prefer a clearer view of pretty Asian girls.  (I can hear the "A-ha!" from
> here.) <vbg>
>
> Pat White

--
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist
fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer


Reply via email to