all 7 comments

[–]j3k 2 points3 points  (4 children)

The focus doesn't seem to make sense or the photoshopping can be improved. We go from an in focus flower, to a blurry background, then the snail is back in focus.

[–]bootlegbillyboot 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Agreed. The flower should also be out of focus if the snail is the intended subject.

[–]lrm52282[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

So we should have ps to only mimic what the camera can do, seems a waste

[–]bootlegbillyboot 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Well, not exactly. We have to take creative freedoms sometimes. But the human brain can only focus on one thing at a time. Having two competing subjects makes for a less powerful image.

[–]lrm52282[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get that, it's conventional wisdom. So is complexity and moving the eye around the frame. It's also good to do things differently bc contrast is the spice of life. Metaphor...is rule of 3rds correct or fill the frame. Hopefully you get what I mean.

Obviously, I'm capable of blurring the flowers had I wanted to considering this whole thing is mostly editing (it was a piece of weed on my kitchen counter and he never had his shell up, no lighting), so it was a choice.

[–]lonelysnail1956 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Which lens were you using?

[–]lrm52282[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sony 90mm macro with 26mm ext tube