|
treebeard
Mar 31, 2005, 10:47 PM
Post #3 of 7
(1232 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2004
Posts: 108
|
It wasnt and auto focus lens. It was a fixed 50mm lens so I just played with focusing different parts of the pic then decided I liked it best as it is, if the hand looks out of focus its cause the shutter speed was a bit slow (1/500th if I remember correctly). Now that the focus is explained any other comments??
|
|
|
|
|
the_alpine
Apr 1, 2005, 4:26 AM
Post #4 of 7
(1232 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2003
Posts: 371
|
Remember, just because you can explain why something isn't right, doesn't make it better. I think something is lost in this picture due to so much out of focus area. The only thing in focus is a little sliver of rock that he's dynoing for - a bit distracting in my opinion. My eye can't find anything to go to, its kind of like an autofocus lens hunting in poor focusing conditions. As is, I believe this is an "almost" image - you almost had a rad shot. Had you gotten the hand in focus(or at least part of it) or maybe added some other interesting compositional element this thing woulda been a true keeper. Keep shooting!
-Chris
|
|
|
|
|
martenb
Apr 5, 2005, 12:18 AM
Post #5 of 7
(1232 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 26, 2002
Posts: 71
|
I agree with 'the_alpine'.
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Apr 8, 2005, 9:52 PM
Post #6 of 7
(1232 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
In reply to: Had you gotten the hand in focus(or at least part of it) or maybe added some other interesting compositional element
to add more to this list, maybe if you had more rock with some features in focus (huh) or at least have the target hold not hidden in shadow, blablabla
|
|
|
|
|
the_pirate
Apr 11, 2005, 5:03 PM
Post #7 of 7
(1232 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 3984
|
Looks like he's dynoing off of a two finger pocket. That deserves to be in focus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
