Showing work...

[veilofgrey]

Posted the same shot in two photocritiquing forums. Should be a hoot to see what they say about the shot. I have posted it previously in my journal for a critique. I am just wondering if they say the same things you (plural sense) said in response to the shot- fuzzy as was shot wide open, with intentional blurring.

Here it is:

Comments

[goddessjustice]

I don't know exactly what you meant by fuzzy vs. open, but from a non-photographer, I like it! Smooth, but it also looks like fun!

~Mir

[veilofgrey]

Yep, we always have fun. I meant fuzzy- her facial features are not as detailed as most of my shots are, you should be able to see better separation amongst the strands of her hair; and wide open- means the lenses aperture was open to about 1.2 so the depth of field (area in focus) was quite small. The wide open goes hand in hand with the limits on detail, basically a lens wide open usually are not working at their best optically so they do not record as much detail as usual, not just in the area of focus.

I am working on a series of these but I am running into a bunch of really unreliable models, etc. for the shoots. sigh...
-Kevin the verbose