Panning blur effect for runners on track
Jul 8, 2019 08:55:11 #
david vt
Loc: Vermont
Hi
I decided to experiment a bit at the final track meet of the season, and played around with shutter speed and panning with runners to see if I could get an effect with the runner sharp and the back ground blurred. Think about panning a race car on a track effect. Was not sure if I could do it (still am not, hence this post) as the relative speed of the runner vs shutter does not allow for as much movement.
Ideally, what I want is the face and body sharp, motion in the arms and legs, and blurred/streaked background, but not sure if that is possible.
Attached is the best of the experimental set. Welcome your feedback on a) if this is possible and b) if so, what settings I might try to improve the result.
Thanks in advance
I decided to experiment a bit at the final track meet of the season, and played around with shutter speed and panning with runners to see if I could get an effect with the runner sharp and the back ground blurred. Think about panning a race car on a track effect. Was not sure if I could do it (still am not, hence this post) as the relative speed of the runner vs shutter does not allow for as much movement.
Ideally, what I want is the face and body sharp, motion in the arms and legs, and blurred/streaked background, but not sure if that is possible.
Attached is the best of the experimental set. Welcome your feedback on a) if this is possible and b) if so, what settings I might try to improve the result.
Thanks in advance
Jul 8, 2019 09:06:30 #
It might help to know what settings you used for this photo. Whatever the shutter speed was I think you should use a higher shutter speed. It seems you are about where you want to be. I like the blurred scene in the background.
Dennis
Dennis
Jul 8, 2019 09:28:10 #
Jul 8, 2019 09:31:13 #
The general rule of panning is the shutter speed should be the reciprocal of the focal length of lens used.
Jul 8, 2019 09:44:42 #
This one is fine. Experimentation will answer your questions. As long as there is enough sharpness of the face, I would think there is success. This one shot at 1/80th would have probably worked just as well shot in a range of somewhat faster. Probably not so much if slower. For settings, one size won't fit all. Movement factors involved, that interact with the settings.
Jul 8, 2019 09:48:23 #
Fotoartist wrote:
The general rule of panning is the shutter speed should be the reciprocal of the focal length of lens used.
I didn't know there was a rule for that, but based on that, this being 1/80th with 70mm is fairly close to the ideal.
Jul 8, 2019 09:54:36 #
Fotoartist wrote:
The general rule of panning is the shutter speed should be the reciprocal of the focal length of lens used.
Not really.
This is from personal experience shooting a lot of motor sport.
Jul 8, 2019 10:03:33 #
david vt
Loc: Vermont
RichardTaylor wrote:
Not really.
This is from personal experience shooting a lot of motor sport.
This is from personal experience shooting a lot of motor sport.
Thanks. This is quite helpful. I will experiment to see if it holds true a lower subject speeds (my runners are more in the 10-15 miles per hour range depending on the race).
shutter speeds will be slower than I might want for HH, as the ones I shot at higher (stared at 500 and worked my way down) did not have any/enough desired blurring effect on the background nor limbs). Not much impact until I started getting below about 125. The key to this may be to see how good the VR on this 70-200 lens works to allow me to hold it steady and pan at these speeds.
Thanks
Jul 8, 2019 10:17:44 #
fergmark wrote:
....This one shot at 1/80th would have probably worked just as well shot in a range of somewhat faster. Probably not so much if slower....
I agree from the point of view of the amount of motion blur in the hands and feet. A bit less would have probably been optimal.
The way to get more background blur with a faster shutter speed would be to stand closer to the runner and use a correspondingly wider angle. It would make tracking a bit harder for both you and the auto-focus (if you're using continuous auto-focus), but pre-focusing and using focus lock would solve that problem.
Jul 8, 2019 10:42:28 #
david vt
Loc: Vermont
@R.G. Thanks. Actually, the comment about 1/focal length above from @RichardTaylor had me thinking about that exact change. At first, was wondering about going out to the long end of the 70-200, but then was then thinking about your exact change as I would have to pan faster, which would blur/streak the background more.
I am thinking, to keep focus, I may want to use a slightly longer DOF. I use BBF, so I am thinking I might let off the button just as I press the shutter to freeze the focus and hold them using the DoF. If I am catching them at “90 degrees”, they wont move much in distance from the camera at their actual running speeds.
I will also try to pick out a shot location where the background is farther away (the stands were just off the track, so roughly 20 feet behind the runner). I think this will help make up for the longer DOF (to keep the subject focused) by having relatively more “panning speed” on a background that is farther away, perhaps giving me the “streaking” effect I see in race cars.
More experiments to come. Thanks
I am thinking, to keep focus, I may want to use a slightly longer DOF. I use BBF, so I am thinking I might let off the button just as I press the shutter to freeze the focus and hold them using the DoF. If I am catching them at “90 degrees”, they wont move much in distance from the camera at their actual running speeds.
I will also try to pick out a shot location where the background is farther away (the stands were just off the track, so roughly 20 feet behind the runner). I think this will help make up for the longer DOF (to keep the subject focused) by having relatively more “panning speed” on a background that is farther away, perhaps giving me the “streaking” effect I see in race cars.
More experiments to come. Thanks
Jul 8, 2019 11:00:08 #
david vt wrote:
@R.G. Thanks. Actually, the comment about 1/foc... (show quote)
The way I get focus lock when doing landscapes is to have the lens in AF mode, get a focus lock using the shutter release at the half-way point and then switch the lens over to manual focus before releasing the focus lock. That will hold the focus lock until you change it manually or switch back to AF.
In your case you could get somebody to stand at an appropriate point on the track and use them to get your focus lock, then just make sure that you shoot the runner at the same point on the track.
Jul 8, 2019 11:13:05 #
david vt
Loc: Vermont
R.G. wrote:
. In your case you could get somebody to stand at an appropriate point on the track and use them to get your focus lock, then just make sure that you shoot the runner at the same point on the track.
Yup - I do that all the time in some events (like long jump or high jump).
Jul 9, 2019 08:04:19 #
Having the face sharp and the limbs with motion blur is a nice look to my eye, dynamic. So that is a good shot to me.
Of course you can cheat a touch and dial in directional motion blur for the background only in Photoshop under the filter menu.
Of course you can cheat a touch and dial in directional motion blur for the background only in Photoshop under the filter menu.
Jul 9, 2019 08:11:01 #
If you wanted a background blur with arm and leg movement and a sharp face, as I think you said, I believe you’ve pretty much nailed it with this photo.
Jul 9, 2019 08:18:00 #
Scroll almost to the bottom here for a calculator relating subject speed to distance and focal length to get shutter speed. https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-shutter-speed.htm of course it matters if the subject is moving toward or away or side to side.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.