Wrenching Pics - So long, /5

[.RJ]

Today Phil used the garage to prep his R60/5 BMW to sell to the next owner, and with nothing to work on I got out the nifty fifty and took pics Pretty impressive amount of work done in one day - I think Phil went through the whole bike in a day :thumbup: Alex came over to put on a new exhaust on his F4i as well.

Full Gallery - <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://boostrot.net/gallery/v/ryan/garage092307/?g2_highlightId=7400">http://boostrot.net/gallery/v/ryan/gara ... ghtId=7400</a><!-- m -->

[Mike]

#1 - i don't like how you cut off the top of the bike
#2 - stand back further... your DOF is too small... you're focusing on the muffler clearly, but the closer part is out of focus... that's doodoo.
#3 - good subject, but i'm sure there was a better angle to be found.
#4 - i'm left scratching my head. what are you trying to show us?
#5, #6 - bad subjects.
#7 - coolant line is very distracting from what could be a cool pic.
#8, #9 - s'ok, but i would have stood further back and cropped to get a deeper DOF.
#10 - my eyes keep wandering around wonder what i'm to look at. if it's to be the bike, frame it, don't have it take up the whole damn picture.
#11, #13 - good. 11 is the best of all of these.
#12 - that kids a retard.

[.RJ]

#4 - i'm left scratching my head. what are you trying to show us?

I like mechanical bits :dunno:

#5, #6 - bad subjects

Why you gotta hate? :lol:

Thanks mikey

[Ginger]

#12 - that kids a retard.

Yeah! Why you gotta hate?

[CaptainHenreh]

I'm with mike, though. 11 is the best. I like 10, too.

[Mike]

Why you gotta hate? :lol:

it's a nurturing hate

overall, i'm pretty impressed with the 50. i'm not sure i do enough shooting in which i don't mind wasting time walking around, but i'm probably going to consider picking one up.

[.RJ]

overall, i'm pretty impressed with the 50

Me too... its small, light and really good in low light - the autofocus hunts in lower light with that lens on but I dont know if thats the fault of the lens or the camera. But for $75... how can you go wrong? Zoom with y0 feet!

I think the shallow depth of field is cool too... but for some of the pics I probably should've stopped down the aperture more.

[Apoc]

Your camera is clearly holding you back. You need to upgrade to a 40D.

[.RJ]

Ass.

[PGK]

I'm reminiscing tonight. I miss that bike.

#4 or #10 are my faves. or #9.

[Evan]

2,3,4 I think the DOF is way too shallow. Background blur is cool but it shouldnt be anything of interest in most cases IMO.
foreground blur almost always sucks. And the whole subject (like the exhaust) should be in focus.

the last pic is so good its a little creepy (although I would crop it, i dont like the foreground bike blur)

[Apoc]

2,3,4 I think the DOF is way too shallow. Background blur is cool but it shouldnt be anything of interest in most cases IMO.
foreground blur almost always sucks. And the whole subject (like the exhaust) should be in focus.

I disagree on all cases. The only thing in focus should be what you want the audience to focus on. This doesn't have to be the entirety of the subject and I'd argue that the most interesting of photos actually don't. I think #3 is actually better because it has a shallow DOF. You want to see Phil but you want people to focus on the mechanics of the bike.

An example below... yeah the purple flowers would have been cool to see but they're not what you want to call attention to.

[Mike]

2,3,4 I think the DOF is way too shallow. Background blur is cool but it shouldnt be anything of interest in most cases IMO.
foreground blur almost always sucks. And the whole subject (like the exhaust) should be in focus.

I disagree on all cases.

#2 and #4 the DOF doesn't make it clear WHAT i'm supposed to be looking at. on #2 it seems the middle of the canister? on #4 i haven't a freaking clue as it's so busy. i thought the bearings, but only half of them are in focus.

edit: for the record, i think #3 is very good.

[Apoc]

I think 2 & 4 are just poorly composed, not a DOF issue.

[.RJ]

Wheeeeeeeee! :lol:

[Feersty]

Ummm, nice pics.

[Evan]

I disagree on all cases. The only thing in focus should be what you want the audience to focus on. This doesn't have to be the entirety of the subject and I'd argue that the most interesting of photos actually don't. I think #3 is actually better because it has a shallow DOF. You want to see Phil but you want people to focus on the mechanics of the bike.

An example below... yeah the purple flowers would have been cool to see but they're not what you want to call attention to.

Background blur is cool but it shouldnt be anything of interest in most cases IMO.

a blurry pink background in a floral shot is very different from a blurry human face. Viewers are drawn to the human face which makes it distracting to the subject and gives the shot an uncomfortable feel. Thats how I reacted to it anyway.
and actually I think your floral pic doesnt look good at all. The bokeh on that lens is nervous and distracting. (and you know macro floral photography has its own rules anyway)

[Apoc]

Well now I know your vision is all jacked up 'cause that's purple. Also, that ain't macro.

[Evan]

whatever, im colorblind
:chewy:

[Dave]

I liked them all, but I'm not a camera nerd.