Blur vs. No Blur

Anonymous · **on:** June 05, 2009, 07:40:23 PM

I've been thinking about this for a while, and would love some opinions if anyone has some to share.

Below is a bathing gull that I took pictures of back in March and in one the action is ok when it comes to sharpness, whereas in the other there is motion detected by the blur of the wings.

Which one do you think holds more character, and if so why??

ravynne40 · **Reply #1 on:** June 05, 2009, 08:24:51 PM

i like the first one, it still shows motion, because of the water droplets (which seem like more in the first pic) and the angle of the wings

the second picture looks like the feathers are matted together (in the grey area)

IreneC.

Moira · **Reply #2 on:** June 05, 2009, 08:53:24 PM

I also like the first picture. I like the sharp angle of the wing, the layering of the feathers underneath and the rippling of the water.

Kin Lau · **Reply #3 on:** June 06, 2009, 12:10:37 AM

Here, I like #1. Mostly due to the wing position.

Wing-blur can be quite nice in the right context.

Bird Brain · **Reply #4 on:** June 06, 2009, 07:01:59 AM

Attila ... I like the first photo. Comments above say it all.

Jo-Anne

Anonymous · **Reply #5 on:** June 06, 2009, 10:57:32 AM

Thank you kindly to everyone for their comments, they are greatly appreciated.

Kin - in your opinion, under what circumstances would wing blur work, apart from hummingbirds??

Kin Lau · **Reply #6 on:** June 07, 2009, 10:21:05 AM

Wing-blur can work in flight shots, or water-fowl doing a flap. A lot depends on the composition tho.

A bit of wing blur with two birds squabbling would work well.

Blur vs. No Blur

Anonymous

Blur vs. No Blur

ravynne40

blur vs no blur

Moira

(No subject)

Kin Lau

(No subject)

Bird Brain

(No subject)

Anonymous

(No subject)

Kin Lau

(No subject)