How can I take pics like this?

[DubZeus]

What setup do I need on my camera to take light trails like this yet still have the car in the shot? As per this pic:

[LongQ]

DubZeus said:

What setup do I need on my camera to take light trails like this yet still have the car in the shot? As per this pic:

That's a relatively long exposure combined with a flash at the start of the exposure. The flash is powerful enough to light the car at whatever the distance was (difficult to estimate since the image might well be a crop) and an exposure long enough to capture the lights to give the length of trail you want to to see. How long that is depends on how fast the car (in this case) was travelling.

DSLRs and compact cameras often have 'Night Scene' settings that attempt to deliver light trails in a pre-packaged form with a flash used either at the start or the end of the exposure depending on whether you want leading or trailing trails.

Realistically though, and especially with a powerful head on light source as per the sample, a built in flash may well not have enough output available to give you the shot. An external flash is likely to be requirement. The more power it has the more flexibility it would offer.

[DubZeus]

LongQ said:

DubZeus said:

What setup do I need on my camera to take light trails like this yet still have the car in the shot? As per this pic:

That's a relatively long exposure combined with a flash at the start of the exposure. The flash is powerful enough to light the car at whatever the distance was (difficult to estimate since the image might well be a crop) and an exposure long enough to capture the lights to give the length of trail you want to to see. How long that is depends on how fast the car (in this case) was travelling.

DSLRs and compact cameras often have 'Night Scene' settings that attempt to deliver light trails in a pre-packaged form with a flash used either at the start or the end of the exposure depending on whether you want leading or trailing trails.

Realistically though, and especially with a powerful head on light source as per the sample, a built in flash may well not have enough output available to give you the shot. An external flash is likely to be requirement. The more power it has the more flexibility it would offer.

Thank you, just what I was after Pic is cropped close up

[theRossatron]

If this was captured with a long exposure wouldn't the car have been going in reverse?

[Simpo Two]

theRossatron said:

If this was captured with a long exposure wouldn't the car have been going in reverse?

What LongQ said.

Flash goes 'poff' and takes image of frozen car, then shutter stays open and headlights create the rest.

[RobDickinson]

Not if the car was lit by a first curtain (normal) flash, then the camera would just capture the lights as it moved forward.

But I dont think thats it, I think there was some fog/mist/dust infront of the car that caused the light beams aka the X files forest episodes.

[LongQ]

RobDickinson said:

Not if the car was lit by a first curtain (normal) flash, then the camera would just capture the lights as it moved forward.

But I dont think thats it, I think there was some fog/mist/dust infront of the car that caused the light beams aka the X files forest episodes.

For this particular image the light beams do look a little odd - almost Photoshopped - but then it looks like a film based shot that will, therefore, have gone through some processing (and probably quite a lot of processing) before digitisation and reaching our screens. Detail will have been smudged.

The partially reflected light from the light bodywork below the lights (I would guess 4 driving lights as well as the regular position headlights) adds to the misty effect just below the light beams.

However, no matter what has happened to influence this particular image the principle of the light beam capture remains the same.

Second curtain flash can be an interesting way to get alternative trails but as I recall many cameras constrain how you can use second curtain flash. Mid exposure flash can be quite interesting, as can multiple flash using, probably, more than one flash unit.

[Simpo Two]

Hmm, on reflection maybe somebody's been doing some burning under the enlarger - the light beams are suspiciously straight and wide.

[flat-planedCrank]

Simpo Two said:

Hmm, on reflection maybe somebody's been doing some burning under the enlarger - the light beams are suspiciously straight and wide.

Surely you must be mistaken as there was obviously no editing of photos before PhotoShop came along?

[Simpo Two]

flat-planedCrank said:

Surely you must be mistaken as there was obviously no editing of photos before PhotoShop came along?

You may be confusing me with someone else; it's no secret what went on with negs and prints in the chemical days.

[Ranger 6]

Simpo Two said:

Flash goes 'poff' and takes image of frozen car, then shutter stays open and headlights create the rest.

Something like this? (I was being followed, hence the lights coming from behind as well)

[jurbie]

More like this.



I have more extreme versions which make the headlights look like laser beams but those sorts of pictures generally look rubbish.

[bobda]

jurbie said:

I have more extreme versions which make the headlights look like laser beams but those sorts of pictures generally look rubbish.

It would look better if you had used a tripod (straight lines) and exposed a bit longer to allow the lights to travel off the edge of the frame. Far from rubbish, just needs a bit of thought and tweaking.

[PJ S]

The original image doesn't smack me of being one taken with a long exposure - if it had, then the car would've been very blurred as a result.
I think the dust/mist aspect is nearer the truth, and I agree the beams look a little too neat.
Should've been a lot more light spill unless they were a particular narrow focus beam Cibié used.

[RobDickinson]

PJS your missing the 'flash' aspect. That would effectively freeze the car at the time of the flash.

But I'm not convinced iot was shot like that anyhow.

[jurbie]

bobda said:

t would look better if you had used a tripod (straight lines) and exposed a bit longer to allow the lights to travel off the edge of the frame. Far from rubbish, just needs a bit of thought and tweaking.

Unless shooting light trails then taking a tripod trackside is at best frowned upon and at worst openly mocked. It also makes panning and the ability to react to the unexpected all but impossible.

I don't think it matters anyway how straight the lines are, laser beam headlights just look rubbish.

[PJ S]

RobDickinson said:

PJS your missing the 'flash' aspect. That would effectively freeze the car at the time of the flash.

But I'm not convinced iot was shot like that anyhow.

I hear you, but I'm not buying it - the light spill from the lights would make the front section over exposed.
I understand if the car was completely silhouetted, then the flash would light up the car behind the headlights and spots.
If that's how it was done, then it's an absolute corker of a shot.

[RobDickinson]

It was shot with flash, of that we can be cartain, almost certainly first curtain flash.

Look at the light.

light from the headlights would not light up the side of the car. there are catch lights on the helmets.

That the car itself as we see it is mostly exposed from a flash is not in doubt.

How the laser lights are achieved could be one of 3 options.

Long exposure with the car moving forward and the tog dragged the shutter.

Dust/fog in the air in front of the car.

Darkroom burning.