Deliberate Camera Movement #2

[Ozzie_Traveller]

G'day all

My local camera club has a DCM comp coming up later this year and I am playing around with wacky blurry images. It's strange to me to do this after years of careful camera work to maintain non-movement

Anyway - here's images 3 & 4 in the experimental set. I chose a slightly dim area in the house, upped the ISO to 1600 to give me some grain, have boosted contrast slightly as needed and tightened the image via Levels

3)-

exif- Panny FZ-200; 1/25s x F3,5; ISO-1600; lens at 5x zoom / 125mm FFequiv

4)-

exif- Panny FZ-200; 1/20s x F2,8; ISO-400; lens at 11x zoom / 275mm FFequiv

As always, feedback welcome
Phil

[wigz]

Neither does much for me Phil but #3 looks the more interesting of these two.

[Isac]

I agree with Alan. With ICM photography the idea is to move the camera when taking the exposure as you know - BUT - you should try and keep something in the image that is recognisable. Here's what I mean with a few quick shots. All taken at 1/6th of a second whilst moving the camera as I pressed and held the shutter. The photos are all showing recognisable content.
PS - You'll have to get the club to call it "Intentional Camera Movement" or ICM photography.
I hope this helps out a bit.

[Ozzie_Traveller]

Hmmmmm - like the red dress though
Phil

[Grumpy John]

I'm with Isac on this Phil, my thoughts on ICM is that some part (if not all) of the photographed object remains somewhat recognisable. When the viewer cannot identify what the object is it, in my opinion, becomes an abstract image. These are my thoughts only, and I have been unable to find a definition of what counts as ICM.
I suppose the question could be asked "what is the difference between ICM and blur?"

[Isac]

I suppose one could say "ICM" is just that - "Intentional" and "Blur" could be renamed to "UCM"

[Grumpy John]

Unless the object of the shot was to enter a project called "blur".

[Isac]

Yes - that would be a different genre.