Too fast. I preferred the still version. This just reminds me of those emails you get with cute litte cats doing things relating to a caption. If the movement here was far more smooth, perhaps a fade between images, I think it could be quite nice. Indra's comment is good though. That is how it comes across. Again, I did like the still image.
+Thomas B it's a motion photography, where you take a series of still photographs and animate them. It's not very mainstream yet, as only recently the technology that can allow normal everyday people to do has recently emerged
+Peter Spencer It's not about this technology Peter (which is not new in the least...) It's about making the image work - and this image is not working with the movement. It's a great still image and that is its strength. Whenever the technology becomes more important than the image it will fail every time. Here are some examples of images that work. Why? Because they are actually quite subtle and work (because they surprise you). The human brain can detect very small movements. That is what people should think about when using this (kinda old) photo trick. Less is always more in art Peter.
Thanks for sharing those. I see what you mean about subtlety. Enjoyed those immensely. --- I do still like Simon's sleeping piece, though --- it strikes me as humorous - a replication of how restless we are while "sleeping."
Why do other artists and people who have no sense of art feel the need to castigate artists who share their work? You all sound like fools asserting your own sense of right and wrong. So what that this technology has been around for a while. So has photography. This is about exploring other ways to see and to share. Try just enjoying what an artist shares with you instead of negatively assessing every judgement they make as if they were intent on deception. Learn to breathe.