There are three primary schools of thought when it comes to blurred wings in flight – not ever, they don’t bother me and it depends on the image. I fall in the latter camp. My gut instinct is to prefer the bird entirely sharp but there are exceptions and this image is one of them.
1/1000, f/9, ISO 500, 500 f/4, Canon 40D, 1.4 tc, not baited, set up or called in
On this day I had been photographing the occasional Northern Harrier as it passed in front of me, usually from left to right as it hunted along a road edge at Farmington Bay. I attempted to get as much depth of field as possible so I was shooting at f/9 but my old Canon 40D doesn’t handle noise particularly well so I didn’t dare go above ISO 500. With the bird at this angle and the camera at these settings the wings are soft, particularly the right one.
But the soft wings in this shot work just fine for me for two reasons: the motion blur provides a sense of movement that would not exist if the wings were sharp and to my eye their softness, in contrast to the sharp face and direct stare from the bird, helps to focus my attention on the amazingly bright and colorful eyes of the male harrier.
But it’s all a matter of taste. Some folks don’t like blurred wings, ever. Others often prefer them. I’ve actually deleted images similar to this one (but without the direct stare) because of motion blur that didn’t appeal to me.
To quote Sly and the Family Stone, “Different strokes for different folks”. And yes, I am that old…
Ron
“Depends on the image.” Yep, that’s a good school of thought as each situation is different and actually can have very different meanings to the photographer.
Superb image – what a face!
(In my hazy memory, Sly is still “modern music”……) 🙂
I’m that old too lol…I like the intense look the bird gave you.
This is a lovely, intense shot. The little imperfections make it real.
The eyes. And the talons.
And yes, the slight blur gives movement and throws that dynamic glare into prominence. Another winner.
I like the motion blur as long as the head area is sharp with detail and with good eye contact. This image has both of these qualities along with a complimentary background. Excellent shot Ron, way to go.
Wing blur doesn’t bother me a bit, but, boy, that stare does!!! Again, thank god I’m not a vole!!! As for blur, what about hummingbirds? If their wings were NOT shown blurred, they wouldn’t look right…unless they were perching… To toss that image out with its intensity of focus, fanned tail and body detail would be too bad…as it is, the focus is drawn right to the intensity of theses eyes!!!
“As for blur, what about hummingbirds? If their wings were NOT shown blurred, they wouldn’t look right”
Thank you, Patty. I guess this is another case of “different strokes” because I sometimes like to get the wings of hummingbirds in flight sharp if I have enough light and shutter speed to do it (without using flash, of course). A shutter speed of about 1/4000 will do that. I like both types of shots of hummingbirds (but then I’m weird in more ways than one…)
I think it’s the eternal question. To me in most cases, if the eyes are sharp (and Ron THESE eyes ARE SHARP!!!) the rest is secondary. And yes, the blur adds to the majesty of the movement. In the end, it’s YOUR (or OUR, in the universal sense of the photographer / artist who created the image) call. The viewer gets to decide for himself as well.
Well said, Lois. I agree. Thank you.
Another great shot, the blur seems fine to me…Sly and the Family Stone reference; don’t see that everyday, good one!
Thanks, Bill. No, that reference isn’t one you hear much these days. But I did hear it used to describe one of Chris Christie’s recent political speeches, which made me a little hesitant to use it here…
Interesting comment Ron, my first glance at this shot didn’t even hesitate, I only saw the face, the eye and the stare. The left wing was next but the shot brought me right back to the stare. Didn’t really notice the right wing till I started to analyze the shot. I like the image. I have a 50D that I have had for awhile, just got a 5MKIII which I love!
My eyes go to the same places yours do, Dick – and in the same order. Congrats on the new camera! I use the 40D as a backup body for my 2 7D’s and despite it’s shortcomings it’s still very useful at times.
I am with you, Ron. Selective blurring reveals what holds steady in a dynamic process. And yes, it focuses us viewers on those eyes…
Thanks, Alison. Those eyes are something, huh?