Unfocussed foreground

[Dale Villeponteaux]

My wife pointed out that many of my tourist shots have unfocussed
foregrounds. I have appended an example. The unfocussed foreground
doesn't bother me, but that may be because, with age, I am now extremely
farsighted (ocular vision only) and that is the way I normally see. Curious as to whether it
bothers folks with more normal vision.

Regards,
Dale

[BobDavid]

This travel photo is very good, fine. The out-of-focus area in the upper right-hand side of the picture is fine. Personally, I think it would have been nice if the tree in the upper left-hand side wasn't as sharp.

[degrub]

Was that wind blur on the right ? It seems odd, that the right would be so blurred when it appears to be about the same distance as the left.
Frank

[Tony Jay]

Was that wind blur on the right ? It seems odd, that the right would be so blurred when it appears to be about the same distance as the left.
Frank

Except it is quite clear that the leaves and branches on the right are so much closer to the camera than the those on the left.

In answer to Dale's question:
The literal point of focal interest in this image is the skyline of the town.
The trees and the greenery in this image, while part of the image merely provide a framing for the real point of interest - the town.
One is looking through and past the trees - not at them.
I tend to agree with Bob on both points: It would possibly have been better if the trees on the left were similarly blurred, and second, it is actually a very fine image.

Tony Jay

[RSL]

This is one case where you needed f/16 to keep everything in focus. On the other hand, you might select the left tree in Photoshop (you probably could use its color) and blur it so that it more or less matches the blur on the right.