Looking for advice.

[hokies2379]

I shoot a lot of concerts. I normally stay at or over 1/500 because I prefer to freeze the motion.

However, last night I decided to try something different and stayed down at 1/250.

I’ve heard some people say they like seeing motion in music photos, but any kind of blur drives me nuts. I literally hate this picture because of the motion blur. However I like to keep an open mind and know that I’m far from perfect and everyone’s style is different.

What say you?

Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Original katomi]

I like it, there is just that little bit of movement in the hand and drum stick.
Everything else seems sharp,
I take photo that please me, so if the blur drives you nuts the do your own thing.

 

[Derrel]

I think the photo shows just the right amount of blur. More blur might be distracting to me. Freezing motion is less expressive, I think, than suggesting or hinting at a slight bit of movement.

 

[Original katomi]

I like to photo rivers, there was a fad where ,everyone, said that the water should be milky. Like your photo I wanted to show just a bit of movement. I take about 6 shots at different shutter speeds to capture the effect I am looking for.
You seem to have nailed it
As I have said it’s your photo, go with what pleases you

 

[smoke665]

As mentioned above a little blur adds to the shot. Blur on the sticks, even the hands, but the blur on the left upper arm/shoulder is a serious distraction for me, that takes away from the an otherwise great image.

 

[RVT1K]

To me, it conveys the energy of the live performance. I don't find the blur to be an issue.

 

[Derrel]

To me, it conveys the energy of the live performance. I don't find the blur to be an issue.

THIS^^^^^^^^^^

 

[vintagesnaps]

I think your instincts are right, it isn't working and isn't that good. The blur isn't enough to be effective in showing movement, it just makes the picture seem slightly out of focus. It just seems off. My eyes can't focus on it but it's not enough blur to convey movement.

It would take anticipating the action. Notice in a song when the drummer is going to bring the drumsticks up or is getting ready to bring them down toward the drums, have the camera set and ready at a slower shutter speed, and watch for the right moment to release the shutter. I think it needs to have enough movement blur to look like it was done intentionally and captured movement.

 

[hokies2379]

Thank you for all the replies I truly appreciate everyone taking the time. Some mixed responses, for sure.

Some of you have said to shoot for yourself, but I was hired by the band for this, so their opinion matters. Reality is, they loved it.


I still hate it.


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[hokies2379]

I think your instincts are right, it isn't working and isn't that good. The blur isn't enough to be effective in showing movement, it just makes the picture seem slightly out of focus. It just seems off. My eyes can't focus on it but it's not enough blur to convey movement.

It would take anticipating the action. Notice in a song when the drummer is going to bring the drumsticks up or is getting ready to bring them down toward the drums, have the camera set and ready at a slower shutter speed, and watch for the right moment to release the shutter. I think it needs to have enough movement blur to look like it was done intentionally and captured movement.

Any more blur and I’d have lost my marbles haha.

Thank you for your reply! I truly appreciate it.


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Richard Hutchings]

I agree with the band!