a sharp quality to edges, even though there may be movement.

[lieven_van_meulder]

<p>hi,<br /> how can i retain, obtain a sharp quality to edges in photoshop, even though there may be movement in the pictures.</p>

<p>see <br /> igor posner<br /> michael ackerman</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>All I see is motion blur with both. There seem to be no special techniques involved. Posner's images seem to blur only along one axis, so that some edges are sharp, and some are not, depending on orientation.</p>

<p>One technique some photogs use to get motion blur AND some sharpness is to use a tiny bit of flash, but to drag the shutter so that the main exposure is ambient.</p>

<p>The only technique I can suggest in PS would simulate a soft focus lens: Blend a sharp layer with partial opacity over a blurred layer. However, this has nothing to do with motion blurs. You can of course create a motion blur in PS of a sharp image, if that's what you want.</p>

[lieven_van_meulder]

<p>don't think they use flash so often, since the situations of people the photography are often quite <br>

personal in whis-ch you can't flash your subject,<br>

also they do not make 2 shots to blend afterworth to my opinion because it is often difficult to do this , since it <br>

is difficult for me and my camera to makle two almost identical photos of the same situation.<br>

in street photo graphy the subject would have already left the scene.</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>No, what I'm saying is that they just take their shot with a slow shutter speed -- end of story. I don't see anything special that they're doing.</p>

<p>If you want to do street photography with this sort of look, just use a very slow shutter speed. If you want to recreate the look in PS with a sharp photo, apply a lateral motion blur. If you want to do the soft focus thing (which I don't think you're after), you make both layers from the same photo. You blur one layer and then combine with partial opacity. These three approaches each require only a single frame.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Igor Posner's work looks like handheld camera with slow shutter speed, some subject motion blur, with high contrast to emphasis edges to give the illusion of partial "sharpness". There might be a bit of zoom or exaggerated camera motion blur in a couple of photos - hard to tell for certain, which is part of the charm.</p>

<p>I look for this effect in some of <a href="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/16672920-lg.jpg">my own low light photos</a> - easy for me because my hands aren't very steady. Shooting handheld at 1/4 to 1/20th second does the trick, especially if I'm walking while shooting or panning with the subject.</p>

<p>To get that effect of doubling or tripling of edges and body outlines, rather than seamless blur, just experiment with shutter speeds between 1/2 to 1/30th second. Try shooting with one hand - doesn't matter whether it's a camera with conventional viewfinder to the eye, or digicam with arm partially extended, the effect is the same, just degrees of difference in camera motion blur.</p>

<p>Doesn't matter whether you use <a href="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/8503050-lg.jpg">film</a> or <a href="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/16476867-lg.jpg">digital</a>. With film, an acutance developer or developing technique, including most push processing tricks, will emphasize those edges. With digital just experiment with unsharp masking, clarify and contrast controls. Grain from pushed b&w film or high ISO noise from digicams help to mask transitions between sharp and blurred edges. It's mostly a serendipitous confluence of camera motion blur, subject motion blur and luck. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.</p>

<p>Just take lots of photos freely without imposing unnecessary constraints on yourself. Mistakes cost nothing but a fraction of a second of your time. The more photos you take the better your chances of getting desired results.</p>

<p>Another trick: If you're using a camera or lens with anti-shake or some form of image stabilization, try photos with and without the anti-shake. With some tiny sensor P&S digicams, the sensor based anti-shake device can actually emphasize doubling or tripling of outlines, compared with the smooth blurring of edges. Sometimes it's an interesting effect, although most folks who prefer image stabilization to work as expected would regard this as a flaw. For example, the Ricoh GX100 sensor based anti-shake doesn't work worth a darn, but it's useful for <a href="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/16672993-lg.jpg">interesting blurred effects</a>.</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>Hmmmm... To double out of focus lines, you can also put a large, round spot of black electrical tape over the center of a cheap UV filter and shoot with a wide aperture. That will yield the bokeh of a mirror telephoto. See here for an example of how lines are rendered:</p>

<p><a href="http://image66amarillo.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=3194">http://image66amarillo.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=3194</a></p>

<p>Unfortunately small highlights are rendered as donuts, so this would work for some photos and not others. You could of course experiment with other patterns of black electrical tape on the filter. You might get some interesting results.</p>

[anthony_r.1]

<p>Nat Geo photographer William Albert Allard has some amazing low light, slow shutter speed shots in which he captures motion blur while elements in the frame that are not in motion are reasonably sharp. Not sure if he uses minimal flash or just has a rock-steady hand...or both.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Doubled or tripled edges occur naturally with handheld photos at slow shutter speeds. No real need to resort to special techniques. With few exceptions human motion tends to be fairly jerky, which produces the effect of multiple edges. This is most visible along the outlines and highlights, so it tends to be noticeable in subject's eyes as well.</p>

<p>Combine that with subject motion blur and things get unpredictable but interesting. However the blur tends to retain that herky-jerky doubling or multiple outline characteristic. It's just the way most of us move. The exceptions are performers trained in fine motor control - dancers, t'ai chi and yoga practitioners, mimes. But nobody likes mimes, so don't do that.</p>

[lieven_van_meulder]

<p>Thx for the answers.</p>