Panning Shots

[IvanSTi]

Struggling a bit with these, can someone guide me in the right direction.

As you can see from the following image, there's not a great deal of movement (car's doing approx. 30-40mph here) in the scenery, yet the car still isn't that clear (apart from a small area) when viewed as full image.

So what am I doing wrong? it's not that I don't like the images, would just prefer more movement in the background.



Help is appreciated

[Simpo Two]

1) Shutter speed is too fast
2) Car needs to be alongside you for best results

[IvanSTi]

Simpo Two said:

1) Shutter speed is too fast
2) Car needs to be alongside you for best results

What sort of shutter speed are we talking? @40mph for example would 1/160 be too quick still? That equates to the car moving 111.8mm which doesn't seem very far to me, problem after that with longer shutter speed, photo's tend to blurr when shooting static objects never mind moving.

I tried a longer shutter to begin with, but everything was blurred, is it just me that needs to get used to panning?

[Simpo Two]

You just need to find the shutter speed that gives you enough motion blur on the background but allows you to keep the car acceptably sharp. Think of it like a golf swing; follow the car until it's in the right spot, squeeze the button, follow through. Then look at the monitor and decide if you need slower or faster. I'd suggest 1/30th for starters. Keep it smooth and match the car speed as if you're filming video. 'Pan' geddit?

[IvanSTi]

1/30th

Will give it a go, thank you, just practice then I guess

[BOBTEE]

Practise!

The golf analogy is good though I'd say you may struggle at 1/30. I'd experiment from there to your 1/160. Also, keep your ISO as low, 100 if you can.

Also you might want to try altering your focus point. If you're on full auto focus the camera may select something in the background. I tend to just use the centre point.

[Mr Will]

1/30 is never going to be do-able with a 300mm lens but the ideal situation for a panning shot doesn't involve a very long lens.

What you really want is to be close enough to your subject that you can use a moderate focal length to get your shutter speeds down and you want the background to be as far away as possible to increase the amount that it blurs. Subject speed doesn't directly matter, it's all about the number of degrees that you turn the camera.

Practice really is key. Head out to somewhere there will be plenty of cars going past, even if they are boring ones, and just keep trying until you find get a feel for balancing the settings. Track days or test days are ideal for this but your local bypass would work just as well if you are brave enough.

[covboy]

Be careful using too short a focal length lens and slow shutter speed if you want the car to be sharp front to back. (side on especially)The closer you are to the car, the greater the difference in relative speeds of the front/middle/back of the car over the focal plane, leading to only one part of the car appearing sharp and the rest in a motion blur.

OK for some effects if it’s meant

[Neil G60]

1/30! You'd have more success with 1/80 to 1/120 I reckon. Just enough to blur the background and wheel spokes. Try standing a bit further away so the car's going 'slower' as it passes you too. Have a look at some of the pics on flickr of cars at race tracks and check the settings the user set his camera to as well.

[IvanSTi]

Thanks very much for the input guys, will get some more practice in before the Gumball Rally comes past next week

Seems like I was on the right track, just need more practice at moving the camera in time with the subject.

[Simpo Two]

Mr Will said:

1/30 is never going to be do-able with a 300mm lens

Who said anything about a 300mm lens?

The OP worked out that at 1/160th the car moves 11cm - a blur that long will just look like a mistake. Therefore 1/30th will give a trail 59cm long (not the car of course, the background).

Note this is motion blur (which we want) not out-of-focus blur (which we don't)

[Rogue86]

He's right, if you're going to pan you have to be prepared to push the acceptable shutter/focal length combos and go for broke, otherwise your shot will end up alongside the millions of other OK-ish panning shots on the internet. Better to start at 1/30th and eventually get it (after deleting a lot!) than waste your time at 1/160th and working your way down.

Slowest I've managed (hand-held and unsupported) was 1/20th at 400mm panning a Typhoon on take-off. The difficulty is that the slower you get, the less shots you can take in a burst and therefore the less chance of getting a 'keeper'. You probably wouldn't try 1/30th if you needed a shot of a particular car but if you're just getting some practice in and have the opportunity, it's worth starting off slow and getting slower, you'll learn much quicker.

[Mr Will]

Simpo Two said:

Mr Will said:

1/30 is never going to be do-able with a 300mm lens

Who said anything about a 300mm lens?

The OP worked out that at 1/160th the car moves 11cm - a blur that long will just look like a mistake. Therefore 1/30th will give a trail 59cm long (not the car of course, the background).

Note this is motion blur (which we want) not out-of-focus blur (which we don't)

300mm was just an example, but partly mentioned because the OP seems to be using quite a long focal length at the moment.

As the OP is trying to motion blur the background (not the car), the 11cm movement of the car is not directly relevant, it is the number of degrees of panning that is important as it is this that drives the amount of motion in the background.

My rusty trigonometry lets me down as to exact numbers but as you move closer the number of degrees rotation that the 11cm of movement requires will increase exponentially whereas dropping the shutter speed will only result in a linear increase and quickly hits the limits of camera shake.

[Simpo Two]

Mr Will said:

My rusty trigonometry lets me down as to exact numbers but as you move closer the number of degrees rotation that the 11cm of movement requires will increase exponentially whereas dropping the shutter speed will only result in a linear increase and quickly hits the limits of camera shake.

You may be right but pesonally I'd choose a distance and lens that make the nicest composition and leave the trigonometry at home.

The 11cm is relevant because, if the camera follows the moving car, the 11cm (approx) transfers to the background. ATEOTD, the slower the speed, the greater the background motion blur.

[IvanSTi]

That was shot at approx. 50mm certainly no more than 75 as I was using my 24-75 lense I wasn't standing very far away from the cars as they passed. I was obviously taking the shots too early with too fast a shutter speed, details below.....clearly I was way off from where I should have been.

F/8
1/250 Sec
ISO 50
Focal Length 52mm

I understand what you mean about the degrees of rotation being the key factor.

Thanks very much guys. Like I said, I'll get some more practice in.

Edited by IvanSTi on Wednesday 4th June 17:01

[Mr Will]

Simpo Two said:

Mr Will said:

My rusty trigonometry lets me down as to exact numbers but as you move closer the number of degrees rotation that the 11cm of movement requires will increase exponentially whereas dropping the shutter speed will only result in a linear increase and quickly hits the limits of camera shake.

You may be right but pesonally I'd choose a distance and lens that make the nicest composition and leave the trigonometry at home.

The 11cm is relevant because, if the camera follows the moving car, the 11cm (approx) transfers to the background. ATEOTD, the slower the speed, the greater the background motion blur.

The 11cm only transfers to the background if the two are close together. As soon as there is any significant distance between the two any kind of relationship goes out the window.

I wouldn't resort to breaking out equations except to prove a point on the internet but the fact remains that the closer you can get to the subject, the easier it is to get a nice panning blur. Of course life isn't that simple and often you can't get closer or there are other factors at play that you decide are more important but to try to pretend that it is not the case is foolish. It's one of the most powerful tools at our disposal for this kind of shot.

[Simpo Two]

Mr Will said:

The 11cm only transfers to the background if the two are close together. As soon as there is any significant distance between the two any kind of relationship goes out the window.

Note the word 'approx' in my reply.

Mr Will said:

the fact remains that the closer you can get to the subject, the easier it is to get a nice panning blur.

Although too close/too wide angle will make part of the car blur as well.

Ultimately this like trying to tell someone how to paint by defining the viscosity of paint. Just get the bloody paint on and engage talent!

[JSS 911]

ƒ/6.3 / 70.0 mm / 1/80sec

Cerb by sinky 911, on Flickr

[flat-planedCrank]

IvanSTi said:

That was shot at approx. 50mm certainly no more than 75 as I was using my 24-75 lense I wasn't standing very far away from the cars as they passed. I was obviously taking the shots too early with too fast a shutter speed, details below.....clearly I was way off from where I should have been.

F/8
1/250 Sec
ISO 50
Focal Length 52mm

I understand what you mean about the degrees of rotation being the key factor.

Thanks very much guys. Like I said, I'll get some more practice in.

Edited by IvanSTi on Wednesday 4th June 17:01

If it's at a circuit then I'd get some 'bankers' in at a higher shutter speed first - your hit-rate for slow shutter speed shots is going to be (sometimes a lot) lower.

It's about panning technique as well, try and be smooth in your movements. When panning with the car try and keep your movement continued after you've taken some shots, that can reduce the amount you try and 'grab' or shake the camera.

I'd say don't get too ambitious initially, keep lowering the shutter speed after you've taken some shots. Going straight to something like 1/25th is a recipe for going home with no good shots (I've been there )


Hope this helps.

[Simpo Two]

JSS 911 said:

ƒ/6.3 / 70.0 mm / 1/80sec

Good result - but I suspect that car was doing more than 30-40mph! So if 1/80th works at (say) 80mph then 1/30th should achieve the same at 30mph.

I think I will patent this as 'Simpo's Fourth Law'