Comments on Fluffytek Art Blog: Blurry is not artistic

One person's sloppy is another person's dynamic. I...

2007-08-16T06:45:00.000+01:00

One person's sloppy is another person's dynamic. If you look at the last two shots of Sabrina from my recent post, the one on the left is intentionally motion blurred to capture the energy of her laughter, which with a slightly different treatment, could almost be read as something more menacing. The one on the right was taken under the same conditions minutes apart, but I did my best to get sharp focus on her, creating a much different mood. Is one "better" than the other? Perhaps, but I think they're both valid.

But please, go ahead and continue to stir things up. It's always so much more charming when done with a British accent. :)

For the record-I shoot fast glass almost exclusivl...

2007-08-16T00:35:00.000+01:00

For the record-

I shoot fast glass almost exclusivly, for the fine depth control.

Most common lens is the 50 1.4 ( will get the 1.2 when I have the funds ). The 35mm 1.4 as well.

Continous light to allow the shallow depth vs. strobes.

I very rarely sharpen images with sharpen or unsharp filters.

I like Blurry at times, if blurry makes sense for a particular image :)

Chipsta

>>>Careful Lin, you are almost tipping into "I don...

2007-08-15T15:10:00.000+01:00

>>>Careful Lin, you are almost tipping into "I don't know much about art but I do know what I like" territory.

Erm....I though I made that pretty clear that this is exactly what I was saying.

I'm not a qualified photographer. My opinion is uneducated and subjective? Didn't I happen to mention that? Several times?

However that doesn't mean I have to lay down and worship every stick figure painting just because it's hanging on a gallery wall.

(You should hear my views on Picasso!)

Hey! This is fun! Clearly I should do ignorant & biased posts, far more often :-)
I do love to play devil's advocate :-) It's what I do.

Incidentally bt, IMO your images do have sharp foc...

2007-08-15T15:02:00.000+01:00

Incidentally bt, IMO your images do have sharp focus. Presumably this is a type of ghosting technique used? But the first image in particular looks pretty sharply focussed to me
http://bp0.blogger.com/_5bMrKlTKQ9k/RsL4xGnE5bI/AAAAAAAAAn8/pYuHCGJkQrw/s1600-h/Maskduelsource1.jpg
Is it art? Certainly.

But my objections are to completely blurry images where you have difficulty making out any sharp features at all. IMO there are far too many of these on MM (and similar sites) which do a disservice to models and the intended photographic techniques themselves.

Yes I appreciate that these could be considered art as well, as each photographer proudly makes his own art, and art is a subjective concept anyway. But fuzzy images with no focus or features at all aren't my "thang" I guess.

Careful Lin, you are almost tipping into "I don't ...

2007-08-15T14:56:00.000+01:00

Careful Lin, you are almost tipping into "I don't know much about art but I do know what I like" territory.

One of my favorite stories is the one about the guy that comments on a rather childish like stick figure painting hanging on the wall in a famous up market gallery. He says " That's not so special,I could have done that!" The simple fact is that he DIDN'T do that and his painting ISN'T on the wall of that famous up market gallery.

That said, niether are any of my works on any gallery walls.

Of late I have been lurking around the flickr website galleries ( up till now I have been avoiding that whole community like the plague) and I am amazed at what is out there. Yep, there is a lot of soft shots and a lot of crap but there is also a hell of a lot of soft shot out of focus art there as well.

Mark

btMany thanks for taking the time to post examples...

2007-08-15T14:39:00.000+01:00

bt

Many thanks for taking the time to post examples. Interesting images and interesting discussion too.

Please feel free to disagree all you want to! That's partially why I did this post, to stimulate debate!

As Iris says, if we all liked the same things, art wouldn't be half as much fun!

Lin,3 photographs can be found on my blog http://b...

2007-08-15T14:30:00.000+01:00

Lin,

3 photographs can be found on my blog http://btcharles.blogspot.com/ . They represent 3 different examples of the duel light source/lens/camera/model movement styles that I use. Simple explanations accompany each of the 3 images. Blurring/movement is accomplished during the exposure and not in postproduction via Photoshop (not that there is anything wrong with using Photoshop to accomplish any desired blurring or implied movement). The bottom photograph is aged/distressed....why?...I love old photographs. I doubt I will be around in 80 years to see my photographs aged and distressed, AND with the new archival technology of the Kodak, Illford and Fuji papers and printing process that I use (not inkjet printing), even if I was alive in 80 years...the photograph may in fact be as pristine as it was the day it was printed. But thank god for the natural aging and distressing of old antique photographs and the inspiration that they offer.

Do I expect everyone to like the blurry/movement/distressed photographs that I create?...absolutely not. I do not create for others or care what they think, I create for myself. If others enjoy and appreciate the look of these photographs....fantastic!!! Again, not arguing or disagreeing with any points made in this blog by anyone.....I am simply offering a different view on the subject.

bt

Lin, I think we all have our personal preferences ...

2007-08-15T11:11:00.000+01:00

Lin, I think we all have our personal preferences for what we like in photos. I have seen blurry done very well, but I've also seen it done very poorly. I personally have a pet pieve against images that aren't exposed properly (or blown out when they are not supposed to be - or flat/lacking contrast), but that's just me, somebody else may just really enjoy that. I'm just glad not everybody likes the same things. This place would be pretty boring.

bt,Interesting as always. Please do you have a lin...

2007-08-15T11:06:00.000+01:00

bt,

Interesting as always.
Please do you have a link to the example of the technique you describe?

I love all types of photography...but am becoming ...

2007-08-15T00:52:00.000+01:00

I love all types of photography...but am becoming more and more fond of blurry or out of focus photos (thank you to my Lens Baby). I also shoot using duel light sources quite often...I meter the hot light (longer exposure allowing a blurry movement)..then meter the strobe to "freeze" the image. I even zoom in or out once the flash fires while dragging the shutter......or move the camera, this allows a sharpness to the main image..and a ghostlike trail. I am showing several of these photographs next month at my Gallery show in Detroit. These photographs are very popular for me and have been so for some time. I am even getting ready to (funny timing here) purposely shoot out of focus. Why? ....Why not?? Again, the Photographer is the Artist...FORCING the viewer to see the image the way HE intends...whether that is in tack sharp focus..or blurry, ...with the goal of forcing the viewer to further digest the image..to study it...to think about it and draw his own conclusions. We alone make the artistic decision. After all, is not art the application of creativity to cause the viewer to look at something in the way the photographic artist intends? I will never abandon my love of using F8 or F11 (talk about tack sharp) to create erotic photographic art, but I also will never abandon creating blurred erotic photographic art. Each are as valid as the other artistically in my book...and just another tool.

Remember what the great Sir Cecil Beaton said...(and my Favorite Quote)

"Be daring, be different, be impractical, be anything that will assert integrity of purpose and imaginative vision against the play-it-safers, the creatures of the commonplace, the slaves of the ordinary."
~Cecil Beaton

2 cents from the American

bt charles

Well...it's a good thing I got over that toycamera...

2007-08-14T17:54:00.000+01:00

Well...it's a good thing I got over that toycamera phase i was into!

Well, it is certainly hard sometimes to tell the d...

2007-08-14T17:43:00.000+01:00

Well, it is certainly hard sometimes to tell the difference. Technically, you are correct; the effect was actually achieved digitally, using the "diffuse glow" filter, which softens features and edges. I did a whole series with Donna, and another with Brooke, using diffuse glow for post-processing.

Stephen I wouldn't say this photo of Donna was blu...

2007-08-14T17:09:00.000+01:00

Stephen

I wouldn't say this photo of Donna was blurry...just soft. Am I missing something ?

Sure you can do controlled depth of field with stu...

2007-08-14T16:23:00.000+01:00

Sure you can do controlled depth of field with studio lighting. It is easier with hot lights than strobes, but as long as you can reduce the light enough (power settings, filters, gels on lights, etc.) to enable you to bring the aperture down, you'll get a narrower DOF.

Hmmm, having posted some "blurry" photos myself fairly recently, I wonder .... Hey, it's just another technique, which can be used to good advantage or abused, like any other.

Stephen