Shutterspeed

Hello. I am a new photographer and still trying to learn everything. I was wondering when you would want to show motion versus motion being frozen. When does showing motion work?

When I used to photograph sports car races, I would occasionally pan a little slower than the cars were moving to show the reality of movement.

When does showing motion work?

Fireworks!

If you shoot a firework skyburst at a fast shutter speed (e.g. 1/125th s), all you'll see is a small circle of sparks. But as you lengthen the shutter speed, the image captured looks more and more like a firework burst appears to the eye.

 

This has to do with our human persistence of vision, and that a long shutter speed captures travelling sparks as a continuous trail of light.

 

The optimum shutter speed for firework bursts is somewhere in the region of 1/8th to 1 second. Together with a corresponding small aperture and a mid ISO speed.

 

Of course the camera needs to be held steady during such a long exposure, preferably using a tripod.

 

Over exposing fireworks loses their colour saturation.

Half-second exposure.

 

Fireworks aren't the only subject that benefits from a slow shutter speed, but they're a prime example. Another example would be flowing water, but that's a matter of personal taste/preference. Some people like their water looking 'frozen' and others like a 'milky' appearance.

Hello. I am a new photographer and still trying to learn everything. I was wondering when you would want to show motion versus motion being frozen. When does showing motion work?

 

Water flowing - in a creek with rocks showing through the surface or a fast flowing rapids. You may take the same scene with s slow shutter from 1/60 second down to about 1 second exposure (use a tripod) and you will get different pictures. Then shoot at 1/1000 of a second and you will have an entirely different picture.

Hello everyone. I hope these two photos will give you an idea of both high shutter speed freezing your subject and what a slower shutter speed and panning the camera will effect. The sit-up race kart on the left was taken with a high shutter speed (1/250th second). The kart is sharp because my camera was focused at that point, but the background is "soft" due to depth of field, not the shutter speed. Please note that the massive Jersey barrier left of the drivers helmet is not streaked.

As to using a slower shutter speed and panning, the blue lay-down kart shows the kart is sharp, but the wall in back of the kart is blurred. Note the vertical smudge near the helmet. This is a small gap in the concrete Jersey barrier coupling point. This "smudge" is produced with the slower shutter speed. Shutter speed was approximately 1/60 second. Of note is that the blue kart is traveling at about 120 mph. Aloha, Bill

Edited November 10, 2020 by Bill Bowes

When does showing motion work?

I'd lean towards blurring the blades of airplanes' propellers and desktop / ceiling fans.

How about compromise by synchronizing flash on your 2nd curtain to freze your subject too?

(tongue in cheek:) "Whenever it has to, because there wasn't enough light, to shoot differently"?

Motorsports & fireworks are two examples where I nearly always use longer shutter speeds, freezing a racing car tends to make it look parked.

Flowing water (with splashes) is a subject that IMO can work very well in either,

 

Other landscapes, macro, portraits & still life are not typically good with motion blur - but if there is motion in a part of the image relative to the rest it can be shown to good effect.

 

Imagine trying to take an image of a typist to show their hands blurring but their head sharp. With a typist like me (slow) the head will move too much & I doubt anyone could get it to work. Some touch typists I've seen barely move their heads & their fingers seem to fly with the right speed this can be shown. :)

 

One of the big advantages of digital is the ability to try things that you don't think will work it doesn't cost anything to take extra shots at different shutter speeds (or other settings). I've often taken shots where I pushing the limits of what is expected to work (like handholding for half a second) yes most of the time these go straight in the digital bin, but just occasionally they work out & give results you couldn't have got otherwise (or needing the tripod you'd left in the car 2 miles away)

 

Imagination can give some hints of what MIGHT work, and experimentation can then hone in on the settings that gives the desired effect or shows it doesn't work for other reasons. Depending on the reasons it didn't work changing the set-up/lighting might give rise to another round of experiments.

Fire!

It's a bit of an obsession of mine :)

I run my local fire club for fire performers and those just interested in playing with fire in a safe envvironment.

20200204223701070 Ken Dunton by Ken Dunton, on Flickr

Slow shutter speed pictures of public places can make people in the scene look blurry and ghost like.

 

Edited November 10, 2020 by John Seaman

Here's a very intentional use of a slow shutter (30 seconds, to be exact) used to create a specific, desired effect.

Hello. I am a new photographer and still trying to learn everything. I was wondering when you would want to show motion versus motion being frozen. When does showing motion work?

 

Hi Anamedina,

For blurred photos you can look at the work of Michael ackerman.

OP not seen for over a month now.

OP could still be reading contributions to this and other threads.

And it's a many to many thing; the OP is not the only one who might still be reading.

OP not seen for over a month now.

Weird.

I got trashed by admin for pointing that out on another thread.

C'est la vie! :)

Moderator Note -

 

OP not seen for over a month now.

Weird.

I got trashed by admin for pointing that out on another thread.

C'est la vie! :)

 

There are a few points here -

Firstly, one doesn't need to log in to read the Forums - the 'last seen' on one's account is the last login time.

 

Secondly, what is apparent, but not so apparent to most members, is some new members are quite 'casual', in so far as they join up to ask a specific question then once satisfied with the answer disappear only to join up again (which is not allowed for various reasons) to ask another question.

 

Thirdly, Forum Conversations, whist they might be interpreted by some as a "question - answer" specifically directed to the OP, in fact it is a "forum" between all and not a consultation or interview directed only to the OP.

 

Fourthly, though maybe not used often, Forum Conversations are archived and are used for reference, this is evidenced by some resurrected conversations that we see.

 

Fifthly, whilst Ken might perceived being previously "trashed" that was not the intent, and not the fact, moreover his comments on that previous thread were in error of fact and that was pointed out.

 

A salient point is - what purpose does it serve to point out that the OP hasn't been seen for a period of time. On the one hand, if any member wants to investigate how old a thread; what date the last comment was made; when did the OP last log in - these answers are all readily available and any member can process that if that is a consideration for them to make comment or not. (that's a rhetoric question).

 

On the other hand such comments, especially if they become a trend, do have an edge to them which to a new member, especially in the view of young members, that Photo.net is just full of grumpy old men (and that phrase has been directly been passed on to Moderators by some new members as why they will not return): these type of comments imply an expectation that all new members have some obligation to hang around - they don't. There is no such obligation, nor is there any obligation to respond to a thread if one thinks that response will be wasted.

 

So for clarity - this is not "trashing" any member, nor any trashing member's comment - nor is it a rule to dictate not to make such comments - simply a request to give pause for thought as to how your comments might or might not forward the conversation nothing more nothing less - especially as this is the Beginner Forum.

 

For additional clarity - there is a rule here that Comments on Moderation are no to be made in the Forums: so please don't.

 

William

I apologise if my innocent comment was misconstrued.

Ken was last seen here.

I apologise if my innocent comment was misconstrued.

 

No apology is necessary.

 

For clarity:

Your comment and the innocent intent of your comment wasn't misconstrued by me: the timing just happened to be that you made a comment similar to many who make the same comment at a time when I had just recently received another PM from a new member asking "what gives with Photo.net?" and that PM contained other comments to which I alluded above.

 

Hence, on balance I considered it appropriate and of benefit to Photo.net and its Membership to post the script above.

 

Wishing you all a Merry Christmas and a safe and Happy New Year.

 

Let's move on. Let's move back on topic.

 

WiIliam

an old post:

Blur motion/freeze motion shutter speeds

You use this technique when it enhances the image or better communicates your intention. Showing motion of people or water against a static background is obvious and intuitive. However, for moving cars, you keep the car in sharp focus and blur the background by panning, not as obvious. In either case you use a slower shutter speed. The difference is sometimes the subject should be flowing, and sometimes the background. You have to think about what you want to convey. And don't overdue it.

If the original poster is reading this, I suggest that she get a copy of "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson.

 

In it, he explains the exposure triangle; shutter speed, aperture and film speed (sensitivity). He shows how, in theory, there are an infinite number of exposure combinations that will result in a "correct" exposure.

 

But he also discusses the idea of artistic expression; what you intend to accomplish with your exposure. He then talks about how to choose which of the many "correct" exposures will create that effect. This includes using slow shutter speeds to show subject motion, as well as using different aperture settings to create various depth-of-field choices.

 

In the digital age, we are lucky. Back in the film era, if I wanted to use a high shutter speed, such as 1/1000 second to freeze motion, along with a tiny aperture, such as f/16 to give me great depth of field, I might not be able to do because I was stuck with the film that was in the camera. I would have to make a choice between freezing motion or depth of field. Today, with my dslr, I can simply crank up the ISO setting to enable me to use that combination.

 

BTW, extremely long exposures, several minutes in length, can effectively make people disappear. I have a welders mask lens epoxied to a Cokin filter holder. This lets me use exposures as long as five minutes at f/16 on a sunny day, with the camera mounted on a tripod. Any people in the picture, who are moving, will usually not sit still long enough to appear in the image, while the buildings and landscape will.