I Don't Capiche

[jophassa]

OK, Why is it that people have to use slow shutter speeds for sports? I thought that they'd need to use fast shutter speeds so as to avoid blurring. But they don't. I thought slow shutter speeds were for dark environments. Can some one shine some light on this for me? DANKS!

 

[Unimaxium]

People do use fast shutter speeds for sports. At least most of the time. Unless you're going for a certain look or something. Where have you seen people using slow speeds?

 

[jophassa]

I hear it quite a lot that people use slow shutter speeds for both low light conditions and sports. i couldnt understand it at all. maybe it is to get a sense of movement?

 

[Digital Matt]

A sense of movement is what you would get, if you used a slow shutter speed with sports. I think maybe you heard it wrong though, because the majority of sports shots are shot wide open with the fastest shutter speed they can get, to "freeze" the action.

 

[jophassa]

ah, cool thanks!

Also, what would happen if i was in a car next to a person who was running and i used a 30 second long shutter lag?

 

[Digital Matt]

ah, cool thanks!

Also, what would happen if i was in a car next to a person who was running and i used a 30 second long shutter lag?

Try it and find out. I can't tell you what exactly would happen. You'd probably get a very motion blurred background, and a blurry subject do to his movement. (arms swinging etc..) If you mean to have the subject in focus and the background motion blurred, this effect works better with a car, because there are no moving parts outside of the wheels.

 

[jophassa]

yeah, you're right, it would. what i was thinking is that you could have a sharp image of the runner at the right of the picture and then have a blurred runner trailing behind it. (assuming the runner is to the left of the car).

 

[Jeff Canes]

--- i used a 30 second long shutter lag?

Wrong term - “shutter lag” is the time between the pushing button and image being record on older digital camera

 

[jophassa]

oops! sorry. what is it then?

 

[Jeff Canes]

oops! sorry. what is it then?

Shutter Speed

 

[Big Mike]

yeah, you're right, it would. what i was thinking is that you could have a sharp image of the runner at the right of the picture and then have a blurred runner trailing behind it. (assuming the runner is to the left of the car).

That's almost the idea...but, as said, the runner would not be totally sharp.

There is a way to get neat motion trails behind a moving subject. Use flash with 2nd Curtain Sync. This is only available with some cameras or some flash units. It fires the flash at the end of the exposure...so if the subject is moving and there is enough light...you will get the blur. Then you will get a sharper subject from the flash. Without 2nd curtain sync, the flash usually fires at the start...which would give you motion blur in front of the subject...which just looks weird.

As for your original idea...try panning. Basically, you stand still and photograph a subject that is moving past you. Use a semi-slow shutter speed. Maybe around 1/15 to 1 second. It takes practice, but if you do it right, you can get a sharp subject with a (motion) blurred background. Google panning.

 

[markc]

1/15 to 1 will proabably be too slow from my experience. If you want to see examples of panning, here are some car shots taken around 1/60 to 1/30, if I remember right. Some may be 1/15, but I think all of those came out too blurry. You need to keep the camera moving and following the object while the shutter is open and you can't see it, which can be tough. It works best if the object is moving past you, not away or towards.
http://www.markcarpenter.com/gallery/autocross20040502

 

[DocFrankenstein]

If you use your lenses wide open, you can easily get 4000+

The resulting photo is a few cars PARKED on a track. WoooHooo!

 

[jophassa]

Wow! thanks, guys! I will have to look into getting a tripod and a 2nd Curtain Sync Flash! It shouldnt be too pricey and it will be worthit!

 

[Philip Weir]

Shooting a 30 second exposure from a moving car would firstly be overexposed unless you shot in the dead of nite, no matter what ISO you were shooting at, unless you could wind the olde camera down to about
1 ISO.
Secondly at that long an exposure, all you would get is a blur. Try shooting a snail with your camera mounted on a sturdy tripod, probably still get blur at 30 seconds. Philip.