Panning in action shots

Hi all

I've been practicing panning my 6900 with moving subjects to suggest speed, but I can't seem to get the subject sharp. It isn't a focussing problem - I got that figured out. I either pan too quickly or too slowly: can't "sync" with the movement of the subject.

I tried about 250 shots (in continuous mode) with the EVF and the LCD but I can't find a way around the freezing of the images. Has anyone successfully tried a different panning method?

Tomorrow, time and weather permitting, I plan to take some more test shots without actually trying to look through the lens, using the hot shoe on top of the camera to aim. Has anyone tried that? I will let you know how it went.

Meanwhile, all suggestions are very welcome.

Pieter

Try keeping both eyes open. It helps to keep the target in view especially if you're using burst mode.

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Hi all

I've been practicing panning my 6900 with moving subjects to
suggest speed, but I can't seem to get the subject sharp. It isn't
a focussing problem - I got that figured out. I either pan too
quickly or too slowly: can't "sync" with the movement of the
subject.

I tried about 250 shots (in continuous mode) with the EVF and the
LCD but I can't find a way around the freezing of the images. Has
anyone successfully tried a different panning method?

Tomorrow, time and weather permitting, I plan to take some more
test shots without actually trying to look through the lens, using
the hot shoe on top of the camera to aim. Has anyone tried that? I
will let you know how it went.

Meanwhile, all suggestions are very welcome.

Pieter

Click to expand...

--
Pat
http://community.webshots.com/user/pfr_01
http://community.webshots.com/user/skate_adventures

I tried it once or twice, but I have a little problem. I happen to be left-handed and consequently look through the viewfinder with my left eye. That means the camera is covering my right eye.

I'm going to practice looking through the lens with my right eye, but it's not easy. It feels like I do everything at half the speed. I will also try aiming with the hot shoe and see what works best.

Thanks and take care,
Pieter

PFR said:

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Hi all

I've been practicing panning my 6900 with moving subjects to
suggest speed, but I can't seem to get the subject sharp. It isn't
a focussing problem - I got that figured out. I either pan too
quickly or too slowly: can't "sync" with the movement of the
subject.

I tried about 250 shots (in continuous mode) with the EVF and the
LCD but I can't find a way around the freezing of the images. Has
anyone successfully tried a different panning method?

Tomorrow, time and weather permitting, I plan to take some more
test shots without actually trying to look through the lens, using
the hot shoe on top of the camera to aim. Has anyone tried that? I
will let you know how it went.

Meanwhile, all suggestions are very welcome.

Pieter

Click to expand...

--
Pat
http://community.webshots.com/user/pfr_01
http://community.webshots.com/user/skate_adventures

Click to expand...

Hi

I don't know the 6900, but can you control the shutter speed? I have the S602Z and you have controll over not only the shutter speed but the ISO.

I would suggest taking some test shots playing with your shutter speed so its not so fast that you lose the effect of motion, but fast enough to lock the subject as you're moving with it.

Failing that what you can do is take the picutre at a high shutter speed and then to suggest speed, use a graphics program such as Photoshop to separate your subject from the background and then put a motion blur on the background. Photoshop also has a function where you can make it look as if you're doing a rapid zoom in while taking the picture which is kind of nice!

But definitely you need both eyes! Is it really that hard to change eyes??? I wouldn't know - I'm not left handed!

The S602Z also has a feature where you can take up to 25 pictures in rapid fire and it stores the last five from when you let go of the button. In this way you can at least have one decent pic! Of course you need the storage to match though

Have you got the camera on a decent tripod? If you get the ones with a fluid head it makes for a much better track of your subject than just handheld.

Cheers,

Phil!

http://www.pbase.com/p_johns

Pieter Gordebeke said:

I'm going to practice looking through the lens with my right eye,
but it's not easy. It feels like I do everything at half the speed.
I will also try aiming with the hot shoe and see what works best.

Thanks and take care,
Pieter

PFR said:

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Hi all

I've been practicing panning my 6900 with moving subjects to
suggest speed, but I can't seem to get the subject sharp. It isn't
a focussing problem - I got that figured out. I either pan too
quickly or too slowly: can't "sync" with the movement of the
subject.

I tried about 250 shots (in continuous mode) with the EVF and the
LCD but I can't find a way around the freezing of the images. Has
anyone successfully tried a different panning method?

Tomorrow, time and weather permitting, I plan to take some more
test shots without actually trying to look through the lens, using
the hot shoe on top of the camera to aim. Has anyone tried that? I
will let you know how it went.

Meanwhile, all suggestions are very welcome.

Pieter

Click to expand...

--
Pat
http://community.webshots.com/user/pfr_01
http://community.webshots.com/user/skate_adventures

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Pieter Gordebeke said:

I tried it once or twice, but I have a little problem. I happen to
be left-handed and consequently look through the viewfinder with my
left eye. That means the camera is covering my right eye.

I'm going to practice looking through the lens with my right eye,
but it's not easy. It feels like I do everything at half the speed.
I will also try aiming with the hot shoe and see what works best.

Click to expand...

I had the same problem when I first got my 602, for years even though I'm right handed I have always taken pictures with my left eye (right eye closed) so its been a nightmare trying to undo years of habit. It does feel wierd, and 3 months on, I still pick the camera up and put it to my left eye, but for action shots switching eyes and using the left eye to look out the side of the camera really is the best way to use the 602 when panning.

If you want to freeze the image a faster shutter speed would be needed. but for a nice sense of speed effect, a slower shutter speed to blur the background and panning with the car to keep it sharp.

Philip Johns said:

Hi

I don't know the 6900, but can you control the shutter speed? I
have the S602Z and you have controll over not only the shutter
speed but the ISO.

Click to expand...

The 6900 goes full manual - it's your 602's predecessor and essentially the same cam but yours has some improvements. I use F5.6 and up with a shutter speed between 1/60s and 1/125s. I pre-focus on the spot where I will most likely get the best view of the subject (cars on the motorway in this case).

Philip Johns said:

I would suggest taking some test shots playing with your shutter
speed so its not so fast that you lose the effect of motion, but
fast enough to lock the subject as you're moving with it.

Click to expand...

Like I said: 1/60s - 1/125s. Seems good to me. If I go to higher shutter speeds, I lose the motion effect.

Philip Johns said:

Failing that what you can do is take the picutre at a high shutter
speed and then to suggest speed, use a graphics program such as
Photoshop to separate your subject from the background and then put
a motion blur on the background. Photoshop also has a function
where you can make it look as if you're doing a rapid zoom in while
taking the picture which is kind of nice!

Click to expand...

It's an option, but I would like to learn to do it with the camera.

Philip Johns said:

But definitely you need both eyes! Is it really that hard to change
eyes??? I wouldn't know - I'm not left handed!

Click to expand...

It feels weird to me. My dominant left eye seems to prevent my right eye from focusing through the viewfinder. I have to concentrate quite hard to actually look through the lens. Otherwise I just look down the side of the lens barrel with my left eye, even though both eyes are open.

Philip Johns said:

The S602Z also has a feature where you can take up to 25 pictures
in rapid fire and it stores the last five from when you let go of
the button. In this way you can at least have one decent pic! Of
course you need the storage to match though

Click to expand...

I only get 5 in continuous mode from the 6900.

Philip Johns said:

Have you got the camera on a decent tripod? If you get the ones
with a fluid head it makes for a much better track of your subject
than just handheld.

Click to expand...

I have a Manfrotto 390. Haven't tried this with the tripod, though. I assomed the panning was easier hand-held. Would you lock the tripod so that it only moves in one plane (i.e. horizontal)?

Philip Johns said:

Cheers,

Click to expand...

Thanks for the post.

Philip Johns said:

Phil!

http://www.pbase.com/p_johns

Click to expand...

PhilO said:

Pieter Gordebeke said:

I tried it once or twice, but I have a little problem. I happen to
be left-handed and consequently look through the viewfinder with my
left eye. That means the camera is covering my right eye.

I'm going to practice looking through the lens with my right eye,
but it's not easy. It feels like I do everything at half the speed.
I will also try aiming with the hot shoe and see what works best.

Click to expand...

I had the same problem when I first got my 602, for years even
though I'm right handed I have always taken pictures with my left
eye (right eye closed) so its been a nightmare trying to undo
years of habit. It does feel wierd, and 3 months on, I still pick
the camera up and put it to my left eye, but for action shots
switching eyes and using the left eye to look out the side of the
camera really is the best way to use the 602 when panning.

If you want to freeze the image a faster shutter speed would be
needed. but for a nice sense of speed effect, a slower shutter
speed to blur the background and panning with the car to keep it
sharp.

Click to expand...

I guess I'll just have to learn to use my right eye more.
Back to the motorway for some more practice!

Thanks PhilO.

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Philip Johns said:

Failing that what you can do is take the picutre at a high shutter
speed and then to suggest speed, use a graphics program such as
Photoshop to separate your subject from the background and then put
a motion blur on the background.

Click to expand...

It's an option, but I would like to learn to do it with the camera.

Click to expand...

I tried this just recently on one of my first shots taken with the S602. It's not brilliant, but I'm quite satisfied, keeping in mind that I have no experience using graphical software at all. Below are the original (in 1 Mp, camera was still in factory setting!) and the one with motion blur, done in PaintShopPro. Both pics were only resized to 800x600. Let me know what you think.

http://www.pbase.com/image/4708820

Original pic.

http://www.pbase.com/image/4708861

Motion blur pic.

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Pieter Gordebeke said:

But definitely you need both eyes! Is it really that hard to change
eyes??? I wouldn't know - I'm not left handed!

Click to expand...

It feels weird to me. My dominant left eye seems to prevent my
right eye from focusing through the viewfinder. I have to
concentrate quite hard to actually look through the lens. Otherwise
I just look down the side of the lens barrel with my left eye, even
though both eyes are open.

Click to expand...

I have the same problem (also left handed). It's as if the right eye only has the function of completing the view, rather than focusing on it.

--
Cheers,
Frank

Frank H. said:

I tried this just recently on one of my first shots taken with the
S602. It's not brilliant, but I'm quite satisfied, keeping in mind
that I have no experience using graphical software at all. Below
are the original (in 1 Mp, camera was still in factory setting!)
and the one with motion blur, done in PaintShopPro. Both pics were
only resized to 800x600. Let me know what you think.

http://www.pbase.com/image/4708820

Original pic.

http://www.pbase.com/image/4708861

Motion blur pic.

Click to expand...

Your motion blur seems to have been executed quite well technically. What bothers me, and that is only my personal opinion, is that it isn't natural. As the dog is running towards you, there is no way you could blur the background with your camera and still take a sharp picture of the dog.

Having said that, I do like the picture and you captured the movement of the dog very well by freezing him (or her?) "in flight". That in itself suggests movement and speed already. In other words, I prefer the original.

I would use motion blur only to suggest movement in a picture that freezes motion with (very) high shutter speeds. To put it differently: I would use motion blur to compensate for my poor technique in action photography.

Thanks for your reaction/information/opinion.

Pieter Gordebeke said:

I have a Manfrotto 390. Haven't tried this with the tripod, though.
I assomed the panning was easier hand-held. Would you lock the
tripod so that it only moves in one plane (i.e. horizontal)?

Click to expand...

Pieter,

I'm only new to photography myself so I do not know all the answers, but I am a professional video cameraman. I know that hand held is very variable as its hard to lock onto your subject. So long as you're subject is moving in a mathematically correct way (ie straight) then you will definitely get a more fluent shot using a tripod. Not familiar with the Manfrotto 390, but Manfrotto is definitely a good brand - have one for my video camera.

If you can lock it to the H axis great! But I'd be guessing you'd find that your subject will not remain in the H axis in terms of a racing car. If you have a fluid head with a long arm for maximum control, that would be your best bet. Just keep practicing - action shots aren't learnt in a day!

Cheers,

Phil!

http://www.pbase.com/p_johns

Hi Frank,

I do agree - if motion blur is to be used it has to be properly executed. The thing is that you were not panning your camera when you took this shot - it should have been perfectly locked off, so there would be no need for a motion blur. Use it when you have been moving the camera a lot and need to let people know that you were if your shutter speed was too high. IE I can take a shot out of the window of my car travelling at 120km/h of the road at a high shutter speed and when you see it there's no blurring whatsoever! That's not normal! That's where you would use photoshop to fix that up.

I haven't got any examples atm, but I will get one and post it.

Cheers,

Phil!

http://www.pbase.com/p_johns

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Frank H. said:

I tried this just recently on one of my first shots taken with the
S602. It's not brilliant, but I'm quite satisfied, keeping in mind
that I have no experience using graphical software at all. Below
are the original (in 1 Mp, camera was still in factory setting!)
and the one with motion blur, done in PaintShopPro. Both pics were
only resized to 800x600. Let me know what you think.

http://www.pbase.com/image/4708820

Original pic.

http://www.pbase.com/image/4708861

Motion blur pic.

Click to expand...

Your motion blur seems to have been executed quite well
technically. What bothers me, and that is only my personal opinion,
is that it isn't natural. As the dog is running towards you, there
is no way you could blur the background with your camera and still
take a sharp picture of the dog.

Having said that, I do like the picture and you captured the
movement of the dog very well by freezing him (or her?) "in
flight". That in itself suggests movement and speed already. In
other words, I prefer the original.

I would use motion blur only to suggest movement in a picture that
freezes motion with (very) high shutter speeds. To put it
differently: I would use motion blur to compensate for my poor
technique in action photography.

Thanks for your reaction/information/opinion.

Click to expand...

Pieter Gordebeke said:

PhilO said:

Pieter Gordebeke said:

I tried it once or twice, but I have a little problem. I happen to
be left-handed and consequently look through the viewfinder with my
left eye. That means the camera is covering my right eye.

I'm going to practice looking through the lens with my right eye,
but it's not easy. It feels like I do everything at half the speed.
I will also try aiming with the hot shoe and see what works best.

Click to expand...

I had the same problem when I first got my 602, for years even
though I'm right handed I have always taken pictures with my left
eye (right eye closed) so its been a nightmare trying to undo
years of habit. It does feel wierd, and 3 months on, I still pick
the camera up and put it to my left eye, but for action shots
switching eyes and using the left eye to look out the side of the
camera really is the best way to use the 602 when panning.

If you want to freeze the image a faster shutter speed would be
needed. but for a nice sense of speed effect, a slower shutter
speed to blur the background and panning with the car to keep it
sharp.

Click to expand...

I guess I'll just have to learn to use my right eye more.
Back to the motorway for some more practice!

Thanks PhilO.

Click to expand...

no problem......!

get on Ebay
search for "left handed 602" ..........!!

regards greg........ LOL

Here you go - these pics I did a 5 minute job on just to show how motion blur can look. If you can get it natural, great, but here's an easy cheat!

Cheers,

Phil

http://www.pbase.com/p_johns/motion_blur_pics

Philip Johns said:

I do agree - if motion blur is to be used it has to be properly
executed. The thing is that you were not panning your camera when
you took this shot - it should have been perfectly locked off, so
there would be no need for a motion blur. Use it when you have been
moving the camera a lot and need to let people know that you were
if your shutter speed was too high. IE I can take a shot out of the
window of my car travelling at 120km/h of the road at a high
shutter speed and when you see it there's no blurring whatsoever!
That's not normal! That's where you would use photoshop to fix that
up.

I haven't got any examples atm, but I will get one and post it.

Cheers,

Phil!

http://www.pbase.com/p_johns

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Frank H. said:

I tried this just recently on one of my first shots taken with the
S602. It's not brilliant, but I'm quite satisfied, keeping in mind
that I have no experience using graphical software at all. Below
are the original (in 1 Mp, camera was still in factory setting!)
and the one with motion blur, done in PaintShopPro. Both pics were
only resized to 800x600. Let me know what you think.

http://www.pbase.com/image/4708820

Original pic.

http://www.pbase.com/image/4708861

Motion blur pic.

Click to expand...

Your motion blur seems to have been executed quite well
technically. What bothers me, and that is only my personal opinion,
is that it isn't natural. As the dog is running towards you, there
is no way you could blur the background with your camera and still
take a sharp picture of the dog.

Having said that, I do like the picture and you captured the
movement of the dog very well by freezing him (or her?) "in
flight". That in itself suggests movement and speed already. In
other words, I prefer the original.

I would use motion blur only to suggest movement in a picture that
freezes motion with (very) high shutter speeds. To put it
differently: I would use motion blur to compensate for my poor
technique in action photography.

Thanks for your reaction/information/opinion.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

John Gregson said:

Pieter Gordebeke said:

I guess I'll just have to learn to use my right eye more.
Back to the motorway for some more practice!

Click to expand...

no problem......!

get on Ebay
search for "left handed 602" ..........!!

regards greg........ LOL

Click to expand...

Excellent tip, John. I can't believe I didn't think of that.

However, that means I will have to learn to press the shutter with my left index finger.

Which is easier? Left hand or right eye? Hmmmmm... dilemma.

BTW, you wouldn't happen to have a brother named Martin, would you? Probably not. More than one Gregson family out there.

Pieter

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Your motion blur seems to have been executed quite well
technically. What bothers me, and that is only my personal opinion,
is that it isn't natural. As the dog is running towards you, there
is no way you could blur the background with your camera and still
take a sharp picture of the dog.

Click to expand...

You are right, it isn't natural. I was just experimenting and had no better pic. that expressed movement. Still haven't actually. I guess it is just an example of how things could look with motion blur, and without a doubt it could be done a lot better than this!

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Having said that, I do like the picture and you captured the
movement of the dog very well by freezing him (or her?) "in
flight". That in itself suggests movement and speed already. In
other words, I prefer the original.

Click to expand...

Me too, no question about it.

Pieter Gordebeke said:

I would use motion blur only to suggest movement in a picture that
freezes motion with (very) high shutter speeds. To put it
differently: I would use motion blur to compensate for my poor
technique in action photography.

Click to expand...

Which could quite easily be done with your car moving pics, as long as the cars are not moving towards you!

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Thanks for your reaction/information/opinion.

Click to expand...

Thank you for yours. And goodluck with your panning shots.

--
Cheers,
Frank

Philip Johns said:

Here you go - these pics I did a 5 minute job on just to show how
motion blur can look. If you can get it natural, great, but here's
an easy cheat!

Cheers,

Phil

Click to expand...

Now, isn't that a miracle: a parked car that moves like hell!

BTW, how do you differentiate between the moving bits and the rest? In my example I made of the dog a different layer (by hand, removing all non-dog material) and blurred the background, after which I placed back the dog. There must be a faster way?

Frank

Hi Frank,

You have to define to the computer the areas that you wish to remain unchanged - ie the car. Because the illusion we are trying to create is that you are following the car with your camera which would mean that the car is the only thing in the image that if it were shot correctly would not be blurry. So yes you do have to extract the object onto its own layer.

What version of Photoshop are you using? I am using PS 7 which has all the tools, but the folowing tools for extraction are...

1. Lasso tool - great but innacurate as it relys on your own hand movements.
2. Polygonal lasso tool - Good for straight surfaces

3. Magnet lasso - Only good if there is a very definitive shape for it to follow. Advantages? Very quick as the computer does the calculating. Disadvantages? Not entirely accurate.

4. Paths - Do a help query on this if you don't know how to use it, but definitely well worth getting to know. Very accurate and you can use beziers to get your angles. Excellent results.

5. (New to PS 6) Extraction tool. Great for extracting hair and finicky images. Inaccurate and needs cleaning up, but good in its hair extraction.

The trick is to use a combination of these tools to get the best selection possible. You can always go to selection> save selection to save it at any time.

However What you can do rather than creating a new layer is to select the dog and then go to select> inverse and put your blur on that, rather than putting the dog into another layer - an option worth exploring!

Cheers,

Phil!

Frank H. said:

Philip Johns said:

Here you go - these pics I did a 5 minute job on just to show how
motion blur can look. If you can get it natural, great, but here's
an easy cheat!

Cheers,

Phil

Click to expand...

Now, isn't that a miracle: a parked car that moves like hell!

BTW, how do you differentiate between the moving bits and the rest?
In my example I made of the dog a different layer (by hand,
removing all non-dog material) and blurred the background, after
which I placed back the dog. There must be a faster way?

Frank

Click to expand...

If you’re handholding the camera it also helps to remember to twist at the waist not the head and neck. This makes you more steadily and pan smoother.

Dan

In that case, the hot shoe may be your best bet. I know some people have knocked together a target range finder and mounted it on the hot shoe for burst mode action shots. You might want to look for something like that.

Pieter Gordebeke said:

I'm going to practice looking through the lens with my right eye,
but it's not easy. It feels like I do everything at half the speed.
I will also try aiming with the hot shoe and see what works best.

Thanks and take care,
Pieter

PFR said:

Pieter Gordebeke said:

Hi all

I've been practicing panning my 6900 with moving subjects to
suggest speed, but I can't seem to get the subject sharp. It isn't
a focussing problem - I got that figured out. I either pan too
quickly or too slowly: can't "sync" with the movement of the
subject.

I tried about 250 shots (in continuous mode) with the EVF and the
LCD but I can't find a way around the freezing of the images. Has
anyone successfully tried a different panning method?

Tomorrow, time and weather permitting, I plan to take some more
test shots without actually trying to look through the lens, using
the hot shoe on top of the camera to aim. Has anyone tried that? I
will let you know how it went.

Meanwhile, all suggestions are very welcome.

Pieter

Click to expand...

--
Pat
http://community.webshots.com/user/pfr_01
http://community.webshots.com/user/skate_adventures

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Pat
http://community.webshots.com/user/pfr_01
http://community.webshots.com/user/skate_adventures

Hello Phil,

Philip Johns said:

Here you go - these pics I did a 5 minute job on just to show how
motion blur can look. If you can get it natural, great, but here's
an easy cheat!

Cheers,

Phil

http://www.pbase.com/p_johns/motion_blur_pics

Click to expand...

The wheels are great! That's not a linear blur, is it? They really look like they're spinning. How did you do that? I tried once before with potatoshop and the background was easy but the wheels looked silly. What's the 'wheel' secret?

MX1700 + borrowed 2800Z