Shoot safe? Or, try harder?

viper_biker

viper_biker

Suspended / Banned
Messages
550
Name
Gareth
Edit My Images
Yes
Now that the bike racing season has started again I seem to be sent a lot of 'safe' shooting? Crisp images but static wheels. Maybe it's just me, but I was trying new things for this year and even shutters down to 1/30th but the acredited 'tog are all playing it safe. Is it because they are 'getting their eye in' or just that the general public aren't too fussed? I've been told some images were blurry/OOF but what do you expect at 1/50th LOL

Maybe I'm just wrong. Here was the best slow shutter I got at the weekend,

DSC_1062.jpg
 
Bit too slow IMO...I think you could go a bit faster and still get spoke blur on those machines - I know I have to go below 180th sec to show rotor-blur on helicopters (after it was kindly pointed out to me here that static rotor blades look like models stuck onto a blue background - you'd think I'd know stuff like that after all these years...lol).
I reckon those wheels are spinning higher rpm than rotor blades...
 
depends why you are shooting

I've got a few keepers from my loop stuff so now I can push harder and try slower speeds to get different shots

1/50 is bloody slow for panning espesh without IS
 
The "not bored photographer" types want to see a little motion blur on the background but the subject itself nice and clear generally.

Panning shots with silly slow shutter speeds rarely get printed - go check out the monthly publications.

Even the Motorsport section "slow hand" regulars almost certainly won't be using those nuts shots commercially.... you just don't get to see the bread and butter shots ;-)
 
1/160th is around my usual for wheel blur on bikes on all but the slowest corners at East Fortune or Knockhill.
 
desantnik said:
Even the Motorsport section "slow hand" regulars almost certainly won't be using those nuts shots commercially.... you just don't get to see the bread and butter shots ;-)
Click to expand...

As you say very few publications will use them and so don't get shown much on forums etc.

david1701 said:
1/50 is bloody slow for panning espesh without IS
Click to expand...

Is it??
 
I'd get rid of the watermark for starts.

the images is too blurry use faster shutter speed
 
I'm not really looking criticism on my own shots. I'd normally shoot from 1/100th to about 1/250th (see below) or at f2.8 for head on shots. What I mean is that a lot of the guys with acreditation are shooting static bikes doing about 100+ mph. When I look at their shots I can't help but think they are failing themselves as a photographer as they aren't really capturing the moment.

DSC_1028.jpg
 
rally-media said:
Is it??
Click to expand...

slower than I'd go without a bushhawk again I'm talking lowfly but it stands. On my non is 70-200 at a 1/100th my keeper rate is very low (slow hercules's fast jets tend to be a lot quicker). Playing with a very nice mans 100-400 with mode 2 IS 1/100 nailed shots every time
 
^To me that looks fine. The bike is still clear but the spokes are blurred...
 
david1701 said:
slower than I'd go without a bushhawk again I'm talking lowfly but it stands. On my non is 70-200 at a 1/100th my keeper rate is very low (slow hercules's fast jets tend to be a lot quicker). Playing with a very nice mans 100-400 with mode 2 IS 1/100 nailed shots every time
Click to expand...

Having never shot low fly I can't comment there, but having shot a lot of motorsport I wouldn't have said 1/50th was excessively low.
 
Most motorsport photographers haven't really shot that much since Novemember and probably want to blow the cobwebs a bit. Also could have been windy or cold and these can have a bearing on keeper rate at slower shutter speeds, especially if they've forgotton their gloves and have lost the feeling in their arms.

I did a track day the other sunday to get into the swing of things and it felt good to be out there again.
 
I'm not a motorsports tog, but just a bit of maths for consideration.....

At 100mph a bike/car is covering 147 feet per second.
In 1/50 second it will cover almost 3 feet.
3 feet is getting on for half a rotation of the wheels.

Based on those figures I would say that for a 100mph bike a shutter speed of 1/160 should give a decent amount of blur (1 foot of tarmac under the bike and 1/6 of a wheel rotation), while helping to significantly reduce the problems of shake or imperfect panning. As bike speeds go up or down the shutter speed could/should be changed to match. e.g. for a 50mph bike a shutter speed of 1/80 would maintain equivalent blur of the background and spokes. For a bike doing 150mph across the field of view you might well raise the shutter speed to 1/250.

That's the maths as I see it. I'm not sure whether the experts would agree that that is a reasonable rule of thumb.
 
viper_biker said:
When I look at their shots I can't help but think they are failing themselves as a photographer as they aren't really capturing the moment.
Click to expand...

You think they are failing as a creative photographer, however they are probably doing well in business!! Its all about supply and demand - you supply what the clients demand
 
Tims figures and maths are correct (as usual, he's a clever whatnot!)

Just thought I would say that :D
 
One of the rules that we always worked by on Superbike was that the stitches in the rider's leathers had to be sharp. If you could see the stitches in his gloves and jacket then it was acceptably sharp.

It depends on the bike too. Jap 4s you can get away with slower shutter speeds than with HDs - because of the vibration of the actual bike from the lumpy engine. Tarmac - smooth or rough? Another blur inducing factor on otherwise good panning technique. No pan can take out the vertical vibration of rough tarmac or lumpy engines.

With a 300 f2.8, manual focus days and Velvia I would shoot as low as 1/60th on the home straight at Donnington, or on smooth radius curves such as inside of Coppice, Gerrards at Mallory or Chris curve at Cadwell and the one before the main straight, can't remember its name now (it has been 10 years or so!)

The thing is, do you risk a bit of artistic interpretation, or get the shot? First off, you get the safe shot, then you can play about to improve it...but having shot them, it is then handed over to some other dimwhit in the office to do picture selection.

Funny thing, picture eds NEVER pic the same shots as the photographer!
 
tdodd said:
I'm not a motorsports tog, but just a bit of maths for consideration.....

At 100mph a bike/car is covering 147 feet per second.
In 1/50 second it will cover almost 3 feet.
3 feet is getting on for half a rotation of the wheels.

Based on those figures I would say that for a 100mph bike a shutter speed of 1/160 should give a decent amount of blur (1 foot of tarmac under the bike and 1/6 of a wheel rotation), while helping to significantly reduce the problems of shake or imperfect panning. As bike speeds go up or down the shutter speed could/should be changed to match. e.g. for a 50mph bike a shutter speed of 1/80 would maintain equivalent blur of the background and spokes. For a bike doing 150mph across the field of view you might well raise the shutter speed to 1/250.

That's the maths as I see it. I'm not sure whether the experts would agree that that is a reasonable rule of thumb.
Click to expand...

ahh, but its about the speed of the object on your sensor, not on the track.
a wheel shot close up is travelling much faster on your sensor than it is if it only covering a small part of your sensor.
a car doing 200mph close up will be more blurry at 1/60th than it would be if its far away.

Also, the closer the spokes are to the wheel hub the slower they are travelling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top