This image could have been a stunner if you used a tripod and a long exposure instead of trying to hand hold it. As it is now, unpleasant to the eye. Good try though.

This image could have been a stunner if you used a tripod and a long exposure instead of trying to hand hold it. As it is now, unpleasant to the eye. Good try though.

First of all, I don't think it's a good try at all. I think yumi is trying to stir things up. Beware.

This image could have been a stunner if you used a tripod and a long exposure instead of trying to hand hold it. As it is now, unpleasant to the eye. Good try though.

First of all, I don't think it's a good try at all. I think yumi is trying to stir things up. Beware.

Maybe, maybe not.

Having looked over the OP's previously posted shots it looks on par.

Yumi would you mind sharing your intentions on what you were trying to convey, so we can assist you with CC?

One thing I will point out now, as others have probably noticed, seems you have a pubic hair on your sensor.

How long since you had it cleaned?

One thing I will point out now, as others have probably noticed, seems you have a pubic hair on your sensor.

How long since you had it cleaned?

i have been thinking a lot today about a considered and helpful reply to you questions regarding your peacock image but having seen the above post i am guessing that may be i have wasted my time......... do you think so ?

One thing I will point out now, as others have probably noticed, seems you have a pubic hair on your sensor.

How long since you had it cleaned?

i have been thinking a lot today about a considered and helpful reply to you questions regarding your peacock image but having seen the above post i am guessing that may be i have wasted my time......... do you think so ?

I'm truly flattered that you spent much of your day thinking of ways to be helpful, I think the peacock thread has run its course though, would you agree?

Can we get back to photos and stop bickering?

Can we get back to photos and stop bickering?

If you mean this photo 'bkkjames' then I was thinking 'yumidesign' was on about this:-

Bokeh describes the rendition of out-of-focus points of light.

Bokeh is different from sharpness. Sharpness is what happens at the point of best focus. Bokeh is what happens away from the point of best focus.

Bokeh describes the appearance, or "feel," of out-of-focus areas. Bokeh is not how far something is out-of-focus, bokeh is the character of whatever blur is there.

Cup of Tea or Coffee anyone

Yours truly,

Kan Win

P.S. and after 3 or more tries, finally go a photo up.

Bokeh describes the rendition of out-of-focus points of light.

Bokeh is different from sharpness. Sharpness is what happens at the point of best focus. Bokeh is what happens away from the point of best focus.

Bokeh describes the appearance, or "feel," of out-of-focus areas. Bokeh is not how far something is out-of-focus, bokeh is the character of whatever blur is there.

Sorry I don't really understand where Bokeh comes into this ?? As you quote "Bokeh is the rendition of out of focus points of light"

This is evident in the following example (not my photo by the way) :

Yumidesigns photo is simply blurred due to camera shake, I concur that a tripod and delayed exposure may of helped produce a more pleasing photo to most of us but fear that it would have created an image that would of offended YD's artistic sensibilities ( ie. not out of the box enough ).

cheers J