Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2013 · does this work? (too blurred?)

  
 
beanpkk
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · does this work? (too blurred?)


Shutter speed too low, but with some panning does it work? Opinions welcomed.

Thanks,
Keith




Flying horse by beanp, on Flickr



Aug 17, 2013 at 07:24 PM
Bob Jarman
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · does this work? (too blurred?)


At the smaller size it passes, however any enlarging and I suspect the quality will rapidly fall off. I've read of ways to minimize blur but never tried - also I think there is a tool in the latest version of PS but do not have access to that.

Of course having the jump posts not there would help but doubt that was possible.

That said, I am not quite sure I understand the question - panning is done when capturing the image. Blur is a result of the camera's moving with the subject, so relative to each other in theory they are moving together, hence no motion, allowing a slower shutter-speed. Relative to everything else, the camera is moving and the selected shutter-speed too slow to freeze that movement resulting in blurred surroundings.

Another parameter is the speed of the subject - here the rider, her boot, and saddle look pretty crisp. I'm guessing a really effective pan would be quite difficult because of the subject's slower movement, not something on the scale of an automobile or thoroughbred race horse, relative to the stationary objects.

I've rambled on...sorry.

<edit>

And, it occurred to me later the saddle, leg, and rider are the elements most stationary WRT to motion of the horse and thus should be sharpest.

Regards,

Bob



Aug 18, 2013 at 07:36 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · does this work? (too blurred?)


I looked through your Flickr set ... there's some pretty nice stuff in there that is miles better than this would suggest.

From looking at your other stuff, I'm guessing this is a practice/test shot (while she's practicing too) that you're trying to develop into a technique, so I'll answer to that rather than the merits of this image itself.

The physics of motion are going to basically be moving in X-Y directions @ one vertical, one horizontal and/or the combination of those two directions (i.e. vector forces) iaw trigonometry. The point of mentioning that is that when you are panning, you are moving the camera (typically) in the horizontal direction, so your panning motion can offset/ motion that is moving in the same direction, but not motion that is moving opposite (either backwards or up/down).

As the horse jumps, there is a degree of the horse (and rider) goes up, reaches the apex (decelerates to zero), then reverses direction and comes back down. When the apex is reached, the vertical motion is essentially at a standstill vertically. If we look at the rider, she is going to be near the apex of the jump so her vertical motion is moving the slowest (note the saddle sharpness) when near the apex of the jump (presumably somewhere over the bar). However, it can also be that she is still "going up" while the horse is "coming down" as the horse (head/hooves) are further along the arc/trajectory of the jump.

The horse is a bit more complex than the rider in that part of the horse is coming down, while part is going up. Additionally, areas like the legs are moving/flexing forward (with your panning) and backward (opposite your panning). Depending on your panning rate and your shutter speed selection, your could range from everything "frozen" to everything in motion blur. Your (horizontal) panning and shutter will influence horizontal freeze/blur, vertical motion blur (note rear hooves) will be relegated to shutter speed.

Not rocket science (okay a little science), but as you dissect which parts are moving in which direction, then you'll be able to decide if you want to increase your panning rate or increase/decrease your shutter to achieve your desired effect of motion blur for background vs. the various sub-elements of your moving subject as it moves in multiple directions simultaneously.

It will also depend on your shooting angle as to how perpendicular/parallel are to the motion. I mention this because looking at your other work, I anticipate you may also be shooting from a slightly more oblique angle as well.

That or just experiment with different panning/shutter speeds ... .

As to this image, I'd consider either a slightly longer FL or closer position, coupled with a slightly faster shutter speed. The closer/longer would make your environmental blur more prominent, while your faster shutter could help with the subject freeze/blur amount. Closer distance/longer FL will of course require you to have a faster panning rate (if wanting to freeze), but the effect will become a bit more dramatic. As is, this particular image is a bit in "no man's land" in that it is difficult to distinguish if this is happenstance vs. intentional. The more dramatic (and more challenging to achieve), the less the viewer can mistake it for happenstance.

Anyway, HTH. Diggin' your work, and the "work ethic" at testing out the technique during practice sessions (the rider & you). Looking forward to seeing your "keepers" once you get it dialed in.



Aug 18, 2013 at 10:38 AM
beanpkk
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · does this work? (too blurred?)


Thanks Rusty and Bob for the great replies and info.

The shot was an accident, the product of too slow a shutter speed. It occurred to me that a little of the right blurring in the right places might actually enhance an image whose whole intent is to show motion, but as you both point out that would be tricky because of the multiple directions of motion going on. A perfect shutter speed might (no guarantees) show a perfectly sharp horse and rider with a moving environment of jump hardware, trees, ground etc. I may try again when I get a chance.

thanks again for the thorough responses.

Keith



Aug 18, 2013 at 03:32 PM
omarlyn
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · does this work? (too blurred?)


I think the image would also have benefited from a tighter crop. As it is, there's so much motion in both the foreground & background that it distracts too much from the subject.

Omar



Aug 23, 2013 at 07:51 PM
beanpkk
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · does this work? (too blurred?)


Thanks, Omar...now that I look at it from that perspective I agree with you. A tighter crop would work better.

Keith



Aug 24, 2013 at 03:17 PM
AuntiPode
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · does this work? (too blurred?)


Panning with the action is usually a good effect. Sometimes adding more to the motion blur of the fixed part is a plus.


Aug 24, 2013 at 06:19 PM
oldrattler
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · does this work? (too blurred?)


Sorry, No... I have been repeatedly told for 40 plus years, No face, no picture. Some might view this as acceptable, but do you want an archive of acceptable, or your best. Keep this image as a reference to how close you were and strive for better. Jim


Aug 25, 2013 at 08:12 AM
beanpkk
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · does this work? (too blurred?)


Thanks, Jim. Good advice there.

Keith



Aug 25, 2013 at 09:43 AM





FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.