Intentional Camera Movement Experiment
Dec 9, 2019 11:48:35 #
I saw a piece on intentional camera movement a few months back. This is the practice of deliberately moving the camera during exposure to render the scene blurred. Is it photography? Well, it uses a camera, so technically I suppose it is. The guy who did it made some wonderful bits of art, so I decided to try it. Something different, you know?
It would definitely take some practice to make this work. Out of three hundred test exposures I got a handful that might have potential. A low keeper rate is expected with this technique, but jeesh. I doubt I will pursue this.
These are my two best images from the day. I like their dreaminess, but I'm unlikely to put them on my wall.
It would definitely take some practice to make this work. Out of three hundred test exposures I got a handful that might have potential. A low keeper rate is expected with this technique, but jeesh. I doubt I will pursue this.
These are my two best images from the day. I like their dreaminess, but I'm unlikely to put them on my wall.
Dec 9, 2019 11:55:36 #
I prefer the first for being able to discern the subject better. I've tried these a few times, as well as zooming in or out rather than - or in addition to - moving the camera itself. I have one really good keeper (IMO) and a few near-misses. As you found, there is a lot of luck involved, at least at first 
Dec 9, 2019 11:56:26 #
These are actually pleasing images to me. I have never tried it on purpose but...
Ed
Ed
Dec 9, 2019 11:59:19 #
Dec 9, 2019 11:59:50 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
I prefer the first for being able to discern the subject better. I've tried these a few times, as well as zooming in or out rather than - or in addition to - moving the camera itself. I have one really good keeper (IMO) and a few near-misses. As you found, there is a lot of luck involved, at least at first
I found that the choice of subject matter is important too. Some things just don't take to the technique. Or maybe it's just the way I do it...
Dec 9, 2019 12:21:51 #
I like the first photo because as Linda says, it is nice to know something about what you are looking at unless it is meant to be a total abstract. As to whether it is photography, of course it is. I would then be more specific and call it art using a camera.
Dennis
Dennis
Dec 9, 2019 12:48:37 #
Dec 9, 2019 12:49:16 #
htbrown wrote:
I saw a piece on intentional camera movement a few... (show quote)
They kinda look like something Ernst Haas would have done. Personally, I hope that you DO pursue this. I have tried this sort of thing, too. Some I like, some not so much.
Not sure what camera you use but if you have Nikon, the DSLRs will automatically adjust expose for multiple exposure shots. I put my camera on a heavy-duty tripod on a windy day and let the camera shoot 10 exposures on one "frame." What the wind doesn't affect stays sharp. Everything else "goes wild."
I liked it, but I want to try it again when the landscape is full of color (Fall leaves, Christmas Lights, Fieldsa of Spring Flowers, etc). Good luck.
Dec 9, 2019 12:53:16 #
htbrown wrote:
I've mostly done vertical motion with trees, but my best was a garden of daisies I found that the choice of subject matter is important too. Some things just don't take to the technique. Or maybe it's just the way I do it...
Dec 9, 2019 12:56:12 #
cameraf4 wrote:
This is a neat idea! Might be similar result to shutter speed motion blur while using a flash simultaneously.... I put my camera on a heavy-duty tripod on a windy day and let the camera shoot 10 exposures on one "frame." What the wind doesn't affect stays sharp. Everything else "goes wild."
Dec 9, 2019 13:47:21 #
cameraf4 wrote:
They kinda look like something Ernst Haas would ha... (show quote)
My camera doesn't do multiple exposures, but I've done something similar by stacking multiple exposures of a splashing stream and reducing the opacity of all but the base layer. In that case, of course, I was interested in keeping the camera still. I was hoping to get something like the blurred effect of a long exposure but with more texture in the water. The results were so-so.
Dec 9, 2019 13:49:46 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
I've mostly done vertical motion with trees, but my best was a garden of daisies
I'd like to see some, if you're willing.
This is not of trees, but instead a forest of masts:
Dec 9, 2019 15:54:30 #
htbrown wrote:
That's interesting, though it looks more lateral movement than vertical. I could be wrong.I'd like to see some, if you're willing.
This is not of trees, but instead a forest of masts:
This is not of trees, but instead a forest of masts:
The first below is the "successful" one I mentioned. It's not cropped and barely edited, so like I said, all luck
#2 was actually done in pp.Ebrunner has posted several in For Your Consideration; I found one thread:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-468858-1.html
I'll ask him about others, and it seems we did a "share" topic a couple of years ago where I posted one or two, but I don't recall who hosted. I'll keep looking.
Thanks!
Dec 9, 2019 18:14:13 #
htbrown wrote:
I saw a piece on intentional camera movement a few... (show quote)
That was me. The key is placing a 6x or 10x ND filter on the lens, set the shutter time to whatever is required for the ND and placing the camera into high-speed continuous mode. For me, a counter-clockwise ¼ turn of the camera works bet. And, as you've discovered, it takes a lot of shots to get something acceptable. It requires a specific type of subject, and you have got to practice a lot.
But, that being said, I like both of your images because of their minimalist nature. It is your chance to create something unusual out of what would have been just another plain image.
Dec 9, 2019 20:28:59 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
That's interesting, though it looks more lateral m... (show quote)
I really like both your photos
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.