NHRA Prostock at US Nationals

[CaboWabo]

Just a couple from the Sunday show

 

[KmH]

Nice and sharp.

When I see a shot of a moving car I expect to see the wheels/tires blurred from the car's motion.
The blurred wheels/tires add to the sense of motion and speed. When the wheels/tires were stopped in the shot, no drama, tension and sense of speed is added to the shot. When we pan the shot some confusion is added by the blurred background.

Trial and error the day you shoot is a way to choose the right shutter speed.

 

[CaboWabo]

I understand what you are saying ...these were shot at F8 1/2000 and iso 400 , any help to adjust them would be helpful , I know a 2.8 lens would work better its just in the cards to get one right now

 

[JacaRanda]

Try 1/1000 and iso 200. Or adjust each by 3rds if your camera allows.

 

[SCraig]

Try 1/125 @ f/16 and ISO 100. A 2.8 lens would have made no difference, there is no reason for one in bright daylight like that.

 

[CaboWabo]

Thanks for your reply's I will adjust them and try again

 

[Derrel]

The car is moving more or less parallel (but not quite!) to the camera back at that position on the dragstrip, so you could get away with any number of different shutter speeds and create a dramatic panning shot, but this high-speed pan + frozen rims and tires look, as KmH lead off with, does not convey much drama or excitement. Something like 1/125 will give a a lot more background blur: 125-250-500-1000-2000, since the time the background is "being dragged" by the shutter is 16 times longer than it is at 1/2000 second.

Most people can easily see doubling of speed pretty easily, or doubling of an aperture value; smaller shifts than a full exposure value, which is a doubling or a halving, often produce hard-to-see differences in the end result. On this shot, I think somewhere between 1/125 and 1/640 would look pretty awesome. That would give the background a less-defined and more blurred look, which would give more of that sense of SPEED! look, and would get the rims and tires blurred, and also you'd see the sponsor decals a little bit unevenly blurred...some more sharp, others less sharp, depending on the exact, precise coordination of the panning speed and the car's travel.

 

[SCraig]

The car is moving more or less parallel (but not quite!) to the camera back at that position on the dragstrip, so you could get away with any number of different shutter speeds and create a dramatic panning shot, but this high-speed pan + frozen rims and tires look, as KmH lead off with, does not convey much drama or excitement. Something like 1/125 will give a a lot more background blur: 125-250-500-1000-2000, since the time the background is "being dragged" by the shutter is 16 times longer than it is at 1/2000 second.

Most people can easily see doubling of speed pretty easily, or doubling of an aperture value; smaller shifts than a full exposure value, which is a doubling or a halving, often produce hard-to-see differences in the end result. On this shot, I think somewhere between 1/125 and 1/640 would look pretty awesome. That would give the background a less-defined and more blurred look, which would give more of that sense of SPEED! look, and would get the rims and tires blurred, and also you'd see the sponsor decals a little bit unevenly blurred...some more sharp, others less sharp, depending on the exact, precise coordination of the panning speed and the car's travel.

Despite what I said in my previous post it's also important to keep in mind: 1) What class is running, and 2) Where one is on the track. I like to get close to the 330' blocks and can usually shoot anything through top dragster at 1/125 to 1/160 second. Top Alcohol, Top Fuel, Fuel Funny, forget it. By 330' they are already moving to fast for me to use a shutter speed that low. At the top end of the track the fuel cars are at or above 300 mph and, at least for me, it is impossible to move my head fast enough to keep them in the viewfinder.

 

[Derrel]

Despite what I said in my previous post it's also important to keep in mind: 1) What class is running, and 2) Where one is on the track. I like to get close to the 330' blocks and can usually shoot anything through top dragster at 1/125 to 1/160 second. Top Alcohol, Top Fuel, Fuel Funny, forget it. By 330' they are already moving to fast for me to use a shutter speed that low. At the top end of the track the fuel cars are at or above 300 mph and, at least for me, it is impossible to move my head fast enough to keep them in the viewfinder.

So what your follow-up post is alluding to is the complicated interrelationship between the shutter speed as related to the distance to the subject; the size of the subject in the frame (magnification); the angle of travel relative to the camera position; the speed of the target;human capability to follow extremely rapid movement at what is basically, close range. I mean close range because, well, you're "close", relatively speaking--not like at an air show when a 650 MPH movement occurs at 1.5 miles away.

Have you encountered any kind of web resource for people who want to shoot drag races, oval track, etc, one that might have examples, tutorials, concepts? Are there any such sites dedicated to automotive/racing/drag education? There are like 10.9 million portraiture sites, 15 million landscaper sites!

 

[SCraig]

So what your follow-up post is alluding to is the complicated interrelationship between the shutter speed as related to the distance to the subject; the size of the subject in the frame (magnification); the angle of travel relative to the camera position; the speed of the target;human capability to follow extremely rapid movement at what is basically, close range. I mean close range because, well, you're "close", relatively speaking--not like at an air show when a 650 MPH movement occurs at 1.5 miles away.

Precisely Just like any other aspect of photography.

And, yes, close can be VERY close! At some tracks if I stand against the fence I'm about 30' from the car in the near lane (I checked the EXIF data from a shot back in June where I know I was standing at the fence. 10.59 meters focus distance) Maybe 75' from the far lane. At the fast end of the track I can barely move my head fast enough to keep up even without a camera in the way

Other forms of racing I'm frequently a lot farther from the cars so the equation changes dramatically. Longer lens, more aperture to get some depth of field to work with, but I can sometimes use a slower shutter speed to. And at night races EVERYTHING changes

Have you encountered any kind of web resource for people who want to shoot drag races, oval track, etc, one that might have examples, tutorials, concepts? Are there any such sites dedicated to automotive/racing/drag education? There are like 10.9 million portraiture sites, 15 million landscaper sites!

No, I haven't. But I haven't really looked either. I'm sure there are some around, but in reality it boils down to trial and error. Finding out what works for an individual is the best way to go about it in my opinion. There are many people much more steady than I am and can hold a pan better than I can. They can get by with a slower shutter speed or crop the shot tighter than I can. As with everything else photography-related, trying things and seeing what works best for each person would be my advice.

Alcohol Funny Car at Beech Bend Raceway on 8/29/15 - 1/160 second @ 10.59 meters.

 

[ratssass]

http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=112667

....there were some very good "panners" that frequented this tab at The Bullet.Sadly,most got tired of their stuff getting "appropriated".

 

[KmH]

I understand what you are saying ...these were shot at F8 1/2000 and iso 400 , any help to adjust them would be helpful , I know a 2.8 lens would work better its just in the cards to get one right now

A Stop

A stop is a fundamental photography concept.

A 'stop' is a doubling (2x) or a halving (0.5x) of the amount of light that reaches the recording media, be it film or an electronic sensor.
A stop change in exposure can apply to shutter speed, lens aperture, and/or ISO.

Since exposure is a triad of adjustments (shutter speed, ISO, lens aperture) you can change 1, 2 or all 3 of the triad settings.

If you want 1 more stop of exposure (brighter) you can adjust just one of the 3 by 1 more stop.
Or, you can change 2 of the 3 by 1/2 more stop each for a net gain of 1 stop of exposure.
Or, you can adjust all 3 by 1/3 more stop for a net gain of 1 stop of exposure.

You can also change the triad of settings and have no change in the exposure.

If you change 1 of the 3 settings by 1 stop more exposure and change a 2nd setting by 1 stop less exposure the net change is zero.
Suppose you subtracted a stop of shutter speed to help stop subject motion, you could add a stop of lens aperture to keep the exposure the same. However, adding a stop of aperture will also affect the total DoF by a small amount. So, if you don't want the DoF to change you would add a stop of ISO instead, however, adding a stop of ISO will increase by some amount the image noise in the photo.

Note: DSLR cameras are set by default to adjust the exposure settings in 1/3 stop increments.
Most DSLR cameras let you change that to 1/2 stop or 1 stop increments.
However, the advantage of 1/3 stop step increments is more precise control of exposure

 

[JacaRanda]

I understand what you are saying ...these were shot at F8 1/2000 and iso 400 , any help to adjust them would be helpful , I know a 2.8 lens would work better its just in the cards to get one right now

A Stop

A stop is a fundamental photography concept.

A 'stop' is a doubling (2x) or a halving (0.5x) of the amount of light that reaches the recording media, be it film or an electronic sensor.
A stop change in exposure can apply to shutter speed, lens aperture, and/or ISO.

Since exposure is a triad of adjustments (shutter speed, ISO, lens aperture) you can change 1, 2 or all 3 of the triad settings.

If you want 1 more stop of exposure (brighter) you can adjust just one of the 3 by 1 more stop.
Or, you can change 2 of the 3 by 1/2 more stop each for a net gain of 1 stop of exposure.
Or, you can adjust all 3 by 1/3 more stop for a net gain of 1 stop of exposure.

You can also change the triad of settings and have no change in the exposure.

If you change 1 of the 3 settings by 1 stop more exposure and change a 2nd setting by 1 stop less exposure the net change is zero.
Suppose you subtracted a stop of shutter speed to help stop subject motion, you could add a stop of lens aperture to keep the exposure the same. However, adding a stop of aperture will also affect the total DoF by a small amount. So, if you don't want the DoF to change you would add a stop of ISO instead, however, adding a stop of ISO will increase by some amount the image noise in the photo.

Note: DSLR cameras are set by default to adjust the exposure settings in 1/3 stop increments.
Most DSLR cameras let you change that to 1/2 stop or 1 stop increments.
However, the advantage of 1/3 stop step increments is more precise control of exposure

Glad you were thorough compared to my little tidbit

 

[CaboWabo]

Thanks again to everyone that commented on this I got alot of info to understand , it was really my first attempt at any NHRA stuff I have a basr I started from and now , I can go from there Thanks again , I am going to another race soon so I will try again