File :-(, x, )
Michifús
Despite all that's wrong with it, I still really, really, really like this picture.

/p/, what do you think?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 30DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsPhotographerunknownMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution360 dpiVertical Resolution360 dpiImage Created2007:04:08 21:21:06Exposure Time1/13 secF-Numberf/3.5Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/3.5Exposure Bias-1/3 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length18.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width800Image Height1200RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> ac
Would be better with less blurry, but I can see why you like it.
>> Michifús
Yeah, unfortunately I didn't have my tripod setup at this time and all attempts to recreate the shot with a pod ended in failure.
>> Anonymous
Even though it's blurry/out of focus/both, this is honestly one of, if not the, best photograph(s) I've seen on /p/.
>> Anonymous
>>40298
>>40409

Same person.

How pathetic.
>> Anonymous
It'd look great if it wasn't blury to be honest.
>> Anonymous
>>40723
No.

I am not Michifús; I just really dig this sort of photography.
>> Anonymous
>>40738
Oh, and in retrospect, it certainly isn't "the," but it's up there.

Plenty of great photos are technically fucked. Robert Capa, anyone?
>> elf_man
I rather like the blur. Gives it a fractured feel.
>> Anonymous
i don't like this one, even if it was in focus. it just looks like "OH HAY IM TAKING A PICTAR LOL"
>> Michifús
>>40723
Yeah, good job Detective Dipshit, that wasn't me.


>>40739
Any links to examples of this? Most of the Capa stuff I unearthed was D-Day shots and the like. Not that I want to start shooting technically bad photos, but I would find it interesting to see what's out there.


>>40741
And spontaneity is bad... because?
>> Anonymous
>>40739

took the words out of my mouth

great picture. Maybe a little better if you had a wider lens so your subjects were less cut off by the frame
>> Michifús
Sorry for the rapid-fire posting as the D-Day shots are actually what I was looking for... just didn't lurk around enough. :D Still, links would be appreciated in case you know of some that I couldn't find.
>> Anonymous
Well, the D-Day shots, obviously, are a classic example.

His masterpiece, "Loyalist Militiaman at the Moment of Death, Cerro Muriano, September 5, 1936," (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7b/Capa%2C_Death_of_a_Loyalist_Soldier.jpg) is not perfectly focused.

There's a bunch of Capa photographs at http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.aspx?VP=XSpecific_MAG.PhotographerDetail_VPage&l1=0&pi
d=2K7O3R14YQNW&nm=Robert%20Capa, but they're unfortunately watermarked.

The very first one they show is slightly blurred and slightly out of focus. And he took it during an air raid. Holy shit.
>> anonamaus
>>40739

i think shooting underfire and being a obnoxious artsy fucktard are two different things. personaly shooting out of focus and slight double exposure stuff bugs the fucking hell out of me, i cant process the image, because the information in the image isnt specific, it winds up just being annoying, selective focus is quite another matter though.
>> anonamaus
>>40857
are you shitting me? yes its focused fine, as are the D-day pictures, he added slight camera shake to the d-day pictures to give the impact of the action, and the loyalist soldier is FUCKING FALLING DOWN SO THERE IS MOTION BLUR. are you guys fucking retarded?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>40907