Maybe it's my monitor then but the eyes look awful. I'll have a look on my iPad and apologise if maybe my crappy laptop monitor is magnifying the problem...
Edit: Sorry but even viewed on my iPad and iMac I can't get on with this one. Seems just about viewable on my iPhone screen but anything bigger and the blur I'm struggling with.
But why would you shoot at ISO 400 when you're at 1/15 sec shutter? If you've got this light at 400 and 1/15, you could easily push to 2000 and shoot at 1/100 without any camera shake. It's a lovely shot but the camera shake kills it for me. I'm just a little baffled why you chose to stick with ISO 400, as a fellow D4 shooter, I'm not sure what the advantage was.
friscoron wrote:
But why would you shoot at ISO 400 when you're at 1/15 sec shutter? If you've got this light at 400 and 1/15, you could easily push to 2000 and shoot at 1/100 without any camera shake. It's a lovely shot but the camera shake kills it for me. I'm just a little baffled why you chose to stick with ISO 400, as a fellow D4 shooter, I'm not sure what the advantage was.
Jim Rickards wrote:
Photography is a learning process. I remember taking pics at 1/15th (I didn't post them, because they were soft).
Now I increase the ISO.
Don't sweat the mistake - just go out and show us a better one.
+1
just go at it again, remember to use that iso, bump it to 3200 if you have to, but don't try to hand hold a camera at 1/15th, it just not going to work.
The eyes are blurred and difficult to look at (as my eyes try to focus on them).
Reminded me of a "3-D" film, seen without 3 D glasses. You know the subject is supposed to look good, but it is hard to look at comfortably and something seems "off."
I agree with the earlier suggestions that increasing either LIGHT or ISO would have made for a better photo.
friscoron wrote:
But why would you shoot at ISO 400 when you're at 1/15 sec shutter? If you've got this light at 400 and 1/15, you could easily push to 2000 and shoot at 1/100 without any camera shake. It's a lovely shot but the camera shake kills it for me. I'm just a little baffled why you chose to stick with ISO 400, as a fellow D4 shooter, I'm not sure what the advantage was.
Because it is a D4. Everyone know that means it only goes up to ISO 400.
Obviously I jest. You bring up a good point and just about any modern body should be able to handle 2000 ISO, but certainly the D4 image quality is still going to be great at that ISO and even quite a bit higher.
Don't mean to pile on with the same things here, but dump this one and do better next time. No harm, no foul. This is too far beyond "slightly soft" to be usable for anything with the exception of maybe a very small avatar or passport photo.
That's the beauty of digital...it didn't work. Oh well. Look how you did it, make adjustments and go try again. Maybe only 2 Killians next time
Should be a tripod shot. I have done the same thing way to many times, hit the shutter and 30 minutes later, it closes lol, at least it feels like 30 minutes.
novicesnapper wrote:
Should be a tripod shot. I have done the same thing way to many times, hit the shutter and 30 minutes later, it closes lol, at least it feels like 30 minutes.
Nope. 1/15th, even on a tripod won't stop blurry portraits, unless your subject is actually a mannequin! It will certainly work for landscape or product shots but in this case the OP should have cranked the iso to achieve a suitable shutter speed.
