Blurry photos: Art?

[synapseman]

I see that there are a lot of people who like to take a ton of pics that are all blurry and pass it off as art. Just anyhow randomly shoot. Half a head, the out-of-focused floor, their shoes, etc. And this is getting increasingly popular. Camera shake is no longer a concern because it's cool to shake your camera! I guess it's supposed to be some form of abstract art.

But I personally don't think so.

Initially I thought it was an interesting concept, but it gets really boring and cliched after a while. If I received a book that had nothing but such "arty" blurry shots, I'd bin it.

Just my opinion...

 

[StreetShooter]

You mean here? In Clubsnap? Or are you confusing us with another photo forum? :devil:

 

[lavenderlilz]

Originally posted by StreetShooter
You mean here? In Clubsnap? Or are you confusing us with another photo forum? :devil:

orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr :devil:

 

[ivor]

Ah-lah... unfortunately, there are people that are like that, and claimed that it is ART...

This can be easlier seen on magazines... Once you become a pro, anything one took whether sharp or blur would be recognise as a master work...

Just my opinion too...

 

[clive]

its good actually. not all lah but soem are good.

eg i had a freak shot of a blurred trishaw rider (i was shootign at low angle, crouching by the roadside, 28mm) then realised its quite ok (he turned out 2b a black shadowy figure whizzing past)

 

[silver.wolf]

any examples?

 

[RuthBaby]

Originally posted by silver.wolf
any examples?

all yr pics are blur... *lolz*

 

[Azure]

National Geographic has a number of such blurry ones, I believe...

 

[rueyloon]

I would just say this,



open your eyes.......

 

[Andy Ho]

I personally don't see any problems with blurry pictures. Unless one is monotonous and boring, his mindset should be open to see beyond using a little blur here and there to spice up his pictures. I would get very very bored if someone showed me his whole portfolio of super sharp pictures. Really bored. Just my personal opinion, you don't have to agree.

Andy Ho
http://andyho.clubsnap.org/gallery/

 

[ckiang]

Someone once said "Nowadays, it's all too easy to take sharp pics, but it's a bit more difficult to take blur pics 'well'."

Regards
CK

 

[MoriMori]

Sometimes you need a bit of blur to make a pic more interesting. Perhaps soft focus effect?

At the street festival I got bored with shooting frozen images so did some slow sync experiments on motion blur.

Is it art? And who cares as long as you like it?

Static

With motion blur

 

[synapseman]

Well, I can see what you're trying to shoot. There is an obvious subject. How about those without an apparent subject? Just like if you hung your camera on your neck and you could somehow let the shutter trip on its own. I suppose it's abstract photographic art, but when it gets all too common, you'd think everybody's just jumping on the abstract-art bandwagon. It's mainly images of nothing.

I guess it's the easy way to make your images "arty". The "conventional" styles as we generally know it are just not as easy to get to be accepted as "art". I guess this is somewhat related to a certain thread: Lomography is...

But let me add: I'm no arts major fella. In fact, I am quite the arts-idiot, so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. Just saying what I think when I see these kinds of images. Not in ClubSnap, I don't think so. But they appear in many photojournals, blogs, etc that are owned by S'poreans.

Just an opinion. Like they say, "one man meat...."

 

[Andy Ho]

Well, to be frank with you. If the photographer loves it, and if his clients loves it, or whoever who sees it loves it, it is an art form by itself. So, who cares?

Andy Ho

 

[Horus]

Well, I can see what you're trying to shoot. There is an obvious subject. How about those without an apparent subject? Just like if you hung your camera on your neck and you could somehow let the shutter trip on its own. I suppose it's abstract photographic art, but when it gets all too common, you'd think everybody's just jumping on the abstract-art bandwagon. It's mainly images of nothing.[\i][\QUOTE]


eh i'm guilty of that too...here's one i took wiff an 80mm equivalent hung around my neck and hand on shutter release :embrass:

 

[Andy Ho]

Originally posted by Horus

Well, I can see what you're trying to shoot. There is an obvious subject. How about those without an apparent subject? Just like if you hung your camera on your neck and you could somehow let the shutter trip on its own. I suppose it's abstract photographic art, but when it gets all too common, you'd think everybody's just jumping on the abstract-art bandwagon. It's mainly images of nothing.[\i][\QUOTE]


eh i'm guilty of that too...here's one i took wiff an 80mm equivalent hung around my neck and hand on shutter release :embrass:

I love it!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Andy Ho
http://andyho.clubsnap.org/gallery/

 

[Andy Ho]

Originally posted by MoriMori
Sometimes you need a bit of blur to make a pic more interesting. Perhaps soft focus effect?

With motion blur

I love this too!!!:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Andy Ho

 

[Andy Ho]

Hi synapseman,

Don't get me wrong. i am not out to spike you but I am really a fan of artfully blurred pictures. If you have the creativity to do it artfully and it looks good and interesting (at least to me), I don't really care what the others will say anymore.

Andy Ho
http://andyho.clubsnap.org/gallery/

 

[StreetShooter]

Studies in motion

 

[togu]

Hoho, is there a clear definition between OOF and Blurry?