How was this one done?

[-DeaDLocK-]

Publication: Evo Magazine.

Issue: March '05, with the AMV8 on the cover.

Pages: 92-93 Photo Spread.

Subject: A photograph of Richard Parry-Jones driving in a Rangie in what appears to be a tracking shot, but the interior of the cabin is in perfect focus and static whereas the entire exterior of the vehicle and the background is out of focus and in full-on motion blur.

Now my understanding is that Evo don't use photoshop trickery, so I can only assume this was done using some fancy technique.

Can someone enlighten me?

Ta.

>>> Edited by -DeaDLocK- on Friday 18th February 23:55

[Graham.J]

Good question...I'd have said photoshop myself, but lets see....

[LongQ]

-DeaDLocK- said:

Publication: Evo Magazine. Issue: March '05, with the AMV8 on the cover. Pages: 92-93 Photo Spread. Subject: A photograph of Richard Parry-Jones driving in a Rangie in what appears to be a tracking shot, but the interior of the cabin is in perfect focus and static whereas the entire exterior of the vehicle and the background is out of focus and in full-on motion blur. Now my understanding is that Evo don't use photoshop trickery, so I can only assume this was done using some fancy technique. Can someone enlighten me? Ta. >>> Edited by -DeaDLocK- on Friday 18th February 23:55

I haven't seen the picture but from the description it reminds me of the sort of thing that people were doing about 20-25 years ago using long exposures and a zoom in (or was it out?) during exposure The idea being that the focused central image, correctly exposed, would be stronger than any blurred version resulting from the zoom motion. If flash can be used the effect can be enhanced.

Plan B, for a static shot, would be a double exposure whereby your central image is a clear shot and then you reset the shutter without winding the film and do a longer esposure zoom shoot over the top.

Otion C would be to do with making a print of a good original but bending the 'paper' to stretch the printed image. Now I suppose that one could then re-shoot or scan the flat version of that print and still have a good enough image quality for magazine work.

Option D is that it is none of those ...

Edit - a couple of typos that the BB has introduced after I posted ...

>> Edited by LongQ on Saturday 19th February 17:33

[gravymaster]

I think it might have been done as a longish exposure 1/30 - 60th but with a flash triggered in the cabin of the car. This would have kept everything inside exposed correctly and sharp, but given the car the blur.

Cheers

Matt

[-DeaDLocK-]

gravymaster said:

I think it might have been done as a longish exposure 1/30 - 60th but with a flash triggered in the cabin of the car. This would have kept everything inside exposed correctly and sharp, but given the car the blur.

Yes, that would make sense. Only fly in the ointment is that in the photo, the exterior of the off-side (reversed from local sensibilities as the vehicle is LHD) A-pillar is also in sharp focus, but every body part near it in blurred.

If the photo was taken as you described, surely only the bits that the flash had access to would have remained static - that pillar is on the outside.

Hmmm... the mystery deepens.

Though of course I'm probably missing something comepletely obvious and you're absolutely right.

I'd scan and post the photo, but that would probably be illegal.

[gravymaster]

I know the photo and Im pretty sure that is how it is done having seen other similar photos. I think the A pillar is sharp because that might be where the sharpest focal point of the photo is. I dont have it to hand though so I cant say for sure.

Matt