# Something new - Which one?



## ronlane (Feb 9, 2016)

I was playing around with an idea and can't decide which I like better. Thoughts?

1) Triptych of the dunk.




2) 5 shot sequence of the dunk.


----------



## weepete (Feb 9, 2016)

The 5 is better I think, though I'd prefer it if the player wasn't clipped as much. Have you tried doing a 5 shot with the width of the single shots the same as the tryptich?


----------



## ronlane (Feb 9, 2016)

weepete said:


> The 5 is better I think, though I'd prefer it if the player wasn't clipped as much. Have you tried doing a 5 shot with the width of the single shots the same as the tryptich?



Thank you. Yes, I attempted to do that but it was really big and I didn't care for it as much.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Feb 9, 2016)

I like the gold frame on the first one, but the sequence on the second one, does that help?


----------



## tirediron (Feb 9, 2016)

Something sort of between the two?  The three isn't quite enough, the  five maybe a bit too much....


----------



## ronlane (Feb 9, 2016)

imagemaker46 said:


> I like the gold frame on the first one, but the sequence on the second one, does that help?



That does help. I started to do that second one with the gold framing too but didn't.



tirediron said:


> Something sort of between the two?  The three isn't quite enough, the  five maybe a bit too much....



Thanks John, I was purposely avoiding the even numbers because of the "rule" about odd numbers. Guess I can go back and try four.


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 9, 2016)

As a sports nut... I prefer #1. It is simple, nice frame, gets the point across, and the player is gonna love it.


----------



## ronlane (Feb 9, 2016)

jcdeboever said:


> As a sports nut... I prefer #1. It is simple, nice frame, gets the point across, and the player is gonna love it.



Thank you.


----------



## SkyFox (Feb 10, 2016)

I'm also a sports nut, and I agree with the cat above. 

The series of 5 looks a little crowded to me. I think the 3 shot actually makes it easier to envision the dunk. Both are AWESOME, though.


----------



## spiralout462 (Feb 10, 2016)

I like the series of 3.  5 is unnecessary in my opinion.


----------



## ronlane (Feb 10, 2016)

SkyFox said:


> I'm also a sports nut, and I agree with the cat above.
> 
> The series of 5 looks a little crowded to me. I think the 3 shot actually makes it easier to envision the dunk. Both are AWESOME, though.



Thank you.



spiralout462 said:


> I like the series of 3.  5 is unnecessary in my opinion.



Thank you.


----------



## Peeb (Feb 10, 2016)

Preferred the 3-shot sequence as well.  Both cool tho!


----------



## ronlane (Feb 10, 2016)

Peeb said:


> Preferred the 3-shot sequence as well.  Both cool tho!



Thank you.


----------



## dennybeall (Feb 10, 2016)

Also like the 3 shot with the gold trim but would like more brightness. Shallow DOF perhaps would make the background less distracting?


----------



## Derrel (Feb 10, 2016)

I prefer the three-shot sequence. The five-shot sequence seemed to me to dilute the impact.


----------



## ronlane (Feb 11, 2016)

dennybeall said:


> Also like the 3 shot with the gold trim but would like more brightness. Shallow DOF perhaps would make the background less distracting?



Thank you. It was shot at f/2.8 and I was as close to the subject as you could possibly get. Not sure that you are going to get much shallower DOF without adding it in post or shooting with a prime (which I don't have).



Derrel said:


> I prefer the three-shot sequence. The five-shot sequence seemed to me to dilute the impact.



Thank you Derrel.


----------

