One A Day, Day 68: Movement, it can be such an interesting subject. Few have explored this option that is unique to photography as a plastic art. Most of the visual options that a...

Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.

Movement, it can be such an interesting subject. Few have explored this option that is unique to photography as a plastic art. Most of the visual options that a photographer has are never explored. Why is this idea of movement so limited? As I considered this question I was presented with some roving thoughts as to why this was such an issue.

The first and most obvious solution to a perception for movement is that often it required the abandonment of the clarified image. Simply stated is that often viewers are lazy, we want near instant recognition of the reality around us. A large portion of modern art is not grounded in recognized objects that are found in our 'real' world. This is where most of the problem lies.

In photography many see no value in these soft image. Most of the workers with cameras only opt for any unusual images after some thing has happened. The images are things that are products of accidents with a camera, so they are not taken seriously.

Another element is that most camera operators have no clue as to what the tool is capable. How many users of cameras work with wood. When they work with wood do they study the effect of a dull drill bit might have on when drilling on a piece of stock? Can a crud hole drilled through an average piece of pine using a dull paddle bit have a quality desirable as an esthetic fit for a 'finished' work? If it can and we can then intentionally pursue such effects? So then, why not in our photographic images?

Be it wood or image can we entertain the making of these things in a divisive and intentional manner to the conclusion of a way that is a different way of thinking and producing.

VADA and Cristi playing in the Peep Show.

To make this image(s) I have anchored the camera to a solid studio stand located in front of the façade of the front glass panel of the Peep Show. Use of both ambient and flash to make the image, these are balanced about 50% for each. The exposure is a few seconds, while the flash is triggered from a hand held remote. The flash can be triggered at any moment during the exposure. The flash is of short duration and tends to register a some what solid image while the longer ambient exposure registers an image that is built up over the duration of that protracted exposure.

There is of course some movement by the models acting out in the scene; but the real 'curve ball' is that during the long exposure the lens is moved in or out creating a change in focal length.

(Download)

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Strange commentary, strange images.

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

Kmgw9v wrote:

Strange commentary, strange images.

I agree about the images, and I’ll take your word on the commentary.

digit-up Loc: Flushing, Michigan

Timmers wrote:

Movement, it can be such an interesting subject. Few have explored this option that is unique to photography as a plastic art. Most of the visual options that a photographer has are never explored. Why is this idea of movement so limited? As I considered this question I was presented with some roving thoughts as to why this was such an issue.

The first and most obvious solution to a perception for movement is that often it required the abandonment of the clarified image. Simply stated is that often viewers are lazy, we want near instant recognition of the reality around us. A large portion of modern art is not grounded in recognized objects that are found in our 'real' world. This is where most of the problem lies.

In photography many see no value in these soft image. Most of the workers with cameras only opt for any unusual images after some thing has happened. The images are things that are products of accidents with a camera, so they are not taken seriously.

Another element is that most camera operators have no clue as to what the tool is capable. How many users of cameras work with wood. When they work with wood do they study the effect of a dull drill bit might have on when drilling on a piece of stock? Can a crud hole drilled through an average piece of pine using a dull paddle bit have a quality desirable as an esthetic fit for a 'finished' work? If it can and we can then intentionally pursue such effects? So then, why not in our photographic images?

Be it wood or image can we entertain the making of these things in a divisive and intentional manner to the conclusion of a way that is a different way of thinking and producing.

VADA and Cristi playing in the Peep Show.

To make this image(s) I have anchored the camera to a solid studio stand located in front of the façade of the front glass panel of the Peep Show. Use of both ambient and flash to make the image, these are balanced about 50% for each. The exposure is a few seconds, while the flash is triggered from a hand held remote. The flash can be triggered at any moment during the exposure. The flash is of short duration and tends to register a some what solid image while the longer ambient exposure registers an image that is built up over the duration of that protracted exposure.

There is of course some movement by the models acting out in the scene; but the real 'curve ball' is that during the long exposure the lens is moved in or out creating a change in focal length.

Movement, it can be such an interesting subject. F... (show quote)

Really? Used to be known as “pornography” . Still pathetic!
What kind of ?talent? Did that take?? Get a life!!....RJM

vertigo

Lots of interesting stuff happens with long exposures. Sometimes it happens in our "mind's eye" before we hit the button and sometimes doesn't happen until we see the picture.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

digit-up wrote:

Really? Used to be known as “pornography” . Still pathetic!
What kind of ?talent? Did that take?? Get a life!!....RJM

Hmm... suddenly I don't feel so lonely here.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

Kmgw9v wrote:

Strange commentary, strange images.

Hmm... suddenly I don't feel so lonely here.

Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.

vertigo wrote:

Lots of interesting stuff happens with long exposures. Sometimes it happens in our "mind's eye" before we hit the button and sometimes doesn't happen until we see the picture.

Well, it all started a number of years ago. On Model Mayhem there was a discussion about the way a particular image was achieved. It dealt with image distortion. There were a number of suggestions offered, even an idea or two about doing the work as post production in Photoshop. I had seen images like the one in question published and with explanations about the use of a zoom lens and that the effect was producing the result by zooming the lens during the exposure. I then posted the information to the discussion.

The entire 'thing' could have ended there, most would just have moved on but the whole notion of motion 'got under my skin' as is often said. This prompted a much deeper investigation into the nature of photography and the manner by which we as human's see this reality, and so construct our ideas of reality.

Needless to say the future impact of all this will bring into being a completely novel and new age of understanding what we call reality. Photography will begin to be seen as the critical transitional tool for understand the new vision.

So I experiment with photography to create a type of magic that can only be understood in the realms of the senses.

gekko11 Loc: Las Cruces NM

JohnFrim wrote:

Hmm... suddenly I don't feel so lonely here.

exactly

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

Timmers wrote:

On Model Mayhem there was a discussion about the way a particular image was achieved..

You've convinced me that 'Model Mayhem' was the correct name for this group.

Jack47 Loc: Ontario

Surprised UHH didn’t delete it. They should.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

Jack47 wrote:

Surprised UHH didn’t delete it. They should.

Hmm... suddenly I don’t feel so alone here.

OK, I’ll quit. Three amigos are enough to convince me that my thoughts are not outrageously extreme and unfounded.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

digit-up wrote:

Really? Used to be known as “pornography” . Still pathetic!
What kind of ?talent? Did that take?? Get a life!!....RJM

creativ simon Loc: Coulsdon, South London

Timmers wrote:

Movement, it can be such an interesting subject. Few have explored this option that is unique to photography as a plastic art. Most of the visual options that a photographer has are never explored. Why is this idea of movement so limited? As I considered this question I was presented with some roving thoughts as to why this was such an issue.

The first and most obvious solution to a perception for movement is that often it required the abandonment of the clarified image. Simply stated is that often viewers are lazy, we want near instant recognition of the reality around us. A large portion of modern art is not grounded in recognized objects that are found in our 'real' world. This is where most of the problem lies.

In photography many see no value in these soft image. Most of the workers with cameras only opt for any unusual images after some thing has happened. The images are things that are products of accidents with a camera, so they are not taken seriously.

Another element is that most camera operators have no clue as to what the tool is capable. How many users of cameras work with wood. When they work with wood do they study the effect of a dull drill bit might have on when drilling on a piece of stock? Can a crud hole drilled through an average piece of pine using a dull paddle bit have a quality desirable as an esthetic fit for a 'finished' work? If it can and we can then intentionally pursue such effects? So then, why not in our photographic images?

Be it wood or image can we entertain the making of these things in a divisive and intentional manner to the conclusion of a way that is a different way of thinking and producing.

VADA and Cristi playing in the Peep Show.

To make this image(s) I have anchored the camera to a solid studio stand located in front of the façade of the front glass panel of the Peep Show. Use of both ambient and flash to make the image, these are balanced about 50% for each. The exposure is a few seconds, while the flash is triggered from a hand held remote. The flash can be triggered at any moment during the exposure. The flash is of short duration and tends to register a some what solid image while the longer ambient exposure registers an image that is built up over the duration of that protracted exposure.

There is of course some movement by the models acting out in the scene; but the real 'curve ball' is that during the long exposure the lens is moved in or out creating a change in focal length.

Movement, it can be such an interesting subject. F... (show quote)

Timmers I have been using this technique for years not on ladies but with buildings mainly and the movement adds to the image and in most cases gives me a good Abstract image to work on, I have read the comments here and am lost for words, maybe because I follow and admire your work and feel something for your ladies that I find this set exhilarating, amazing and has given me some ideas for a future project

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

I have also used this technique, but not on this type of subject... which is more appropriately presented on other forums.