Understanding Shutter Speed?

[Helen B]

How much is there to know about shutter speed? How deeply does the book go into the nitty-gritty of shutter speed? Is it a comprehensive technical treatment of shutter speed? (Does it explain the relationship between marked speed and effective speed for leaf shutters at different apertures, for example?)

My impression is that it is more about 'creative' ways to use shutter speed - which as Bifurcator suggests may not need a book. It may be more a matter of simply getting a good feeling for what shutter speed physically means, then letting your imagination lead you on an exploration of the boundless possibilities. Some people may find that a book helps, others may get more from their imagination. I suggest that if you have a basic understanding of what the shutter does, you should give your own imagination some exercise before looking in a book. Just try a few things. Different shutter speeds at the same aperture, different shutter speeds at different apertures, somebody walking and running past the camera at different shutter speeds, moving the camera at different shutter speeds. Try it all, see the results.

No book required. Unless the book is Zen in the Art of Archery which might help a Westerner more than Understanding Shutter Speed.

Best,
Helen

 

[Moglex]

How much is there to know about shutter speed? How deeply does the book go into the nitty-gritty of shutter speed? Is it a comprehensive technical treatment of shutter speed? (Does it explain the relationship between marked speed and effective speed for leaf shutters at different apertures, for example?)

I think that's rather part of what the OP wanted to know.

My impression is that it is more about 'creative' ways to use shutter speed - which as Bifurcator suggests may not need a book/

Bifurcator actualy said: "But what's to understand about shutter speed that looking at the back of an open film camera (slr) and watching as you press the shutter release won't teach you?"

Are you seriously suggesting that you can learn about creative techniques by watching the shutter fire?

I'd agree that a beginner does not need a whole book on the subject because most of what s/he will need to know will be covered in a decent introductory book.

 

[Helen B]

Are you seriously suggesting that you can learn about creative techniques by watching the shutter fire?

If you read the whole of my post, you will see that I'm saying that what is right for one person may not be right for another. I do believe, from personal experience as both a learner and a mentor, that creativity (whatever that is) often grows more vigorously from a non-verbal awareness such as that obtained by observing the physical reality of a process. It's not right for all people, and I accept that.

Best,
Helen

 

[Moglex]

If you read the whole of my post, you will see that I'm saying that what is right for one person may not be right for another. I do believe, from personal experience as both a learner and a mentor, that creativity (whatever that is) often grows more vigorously from a non-verbal awareness such as that obtained by observing the physical reality of a process. It's not right for all people, and I accept that.

A non verbal awareness is one thing, and I would certainly agree with you there.

However, claiming that you can "get" that just by watching the shutter fire, a Bifurcator did, is going way beyond achieving non verbal awareness and straight into the realms of cloud cuckoo land (where I exect there are many interesting photo oportunities).

 

[Samriel]

My impression is that it is more about 'creative' ways to use shutter speed - which as Bifurcator suggests may not need a book.

...

I suggest that if you have a basic understanding of what the shutter does, you should give your own imagination some exercise before looking in a book.

I completely agree with this statement. Still, I feel there is nothing wrong with getting ideas from books and other peoples photos, as long as one does not depend on it and neglects his own creative side.

 

[Bifurcator]

You did not work out those things from scratch just by looking at an open camera.

You say that as if you know the inside of my brain. In fact, I did.

 

[Moglex]

You say that as if you know the inside of my brain. In fact, I did.

Of course you did.

(I'll keep him talking - someone call the medics).

Probably just after you worked out general relativity from first principles whilst watching the moon in your pram?

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

 

[Bifurcator]

If you read the whole of my post, you will see that I'm saying that what is right for one person may not be right for another. I do believe, from personal experience as both a learner and a mentor, that creativity (whatever that is) often grows more vigorously from a non-verbal awareness such as that obtained by observing the physical reality of a process. It's not right for all people, and I accept that.

Best,
Helen

Yep! We learn and understand very much about kinetic energy, universal gravitation, and many of the laws of motion for example, from playing with a ball in the house at 3. I know I did for sure! A person's native IQ combined with several environmental factors, are relative to how much and how deep those understandings go. And they can be profound enough in some cases to turn large portions of man kind's (previously thought established) science on it's head. It probably happens much more often than we know as the additional factors important to that person's development toward establishing themselves "credible" in the eyes of considered academia may not ever fall into place.

In my case (on this topic) I watched the horizontal focal plane shutter curtain of my father's Nikon I and understood many things. The Iris too. The later to come SLR split focusing systems threw me for a loop for years tho - till I worked at a camera repair shop for a spell.

 

[Moglex]

In my case (on this topic) I watched the horizontal focal plane shutter curtain of my father's Nikon I and understood many things.

That I can well believe.

There is a great deal to be learned by silent and contemplative observation. A deal more when accompanied by a few jottings, scribblings and calculations.

However, you asked what you could find out from a book that you could not by watching a shutter fire.

One of the things I specified was:

"Actual effect of change of shutter seed with objects moving at different speeds at different distances."

Now, you may be clever. You may be very clever. You may well be exceedingly clever.

But the probability that you could visualise with any accuracy the image captured of a running stream and the actual effect of various shutter speeds just by watching a shutter fire is a number so close to zero that it shares the same toothbrush.

Apart from anything else, if anyone really were that clever, they would be able to deduce exactly the same thing simply from the knowledge that there was a shutter! They would not need to waste time opening the camera to have a look.

 

[Bifurcator]

I completely agree with this statement. Still, I feel there is nothing wrong with getting ideas from books and other peoples photos, as long as one does not depend on it and neglects his own creative side.

Yup! I didn't mean to imply otherwise really. What we already understand from observation is greatly enhanced and reinforced from "putting it in terms" as they say or "seeing it in terms" as I say now. I hope no one thought I was saying books are useless. I just thought The Shutter as an isolated object of study was too simplistic for a whole beginner level book on the topic. <shrug>

You're also right on about learning these things and then letting them go to enhance intuition, for creativity to blossom!

 

[Bifurcator]

That I can well believe.

You probably can. But I'm not doing this again with you where you define and redefine (wrongly I might add!) what I said and then nit-pick it to death.

I'm out. Take your last word.

 

[Moglex]

You probably can. But I'm not doing this again with you where you define and redefine (wrongly I might add!) what I said and then nit-pick it to death.

I'm out. Take your last word.

The following is unedited.

The only addition is the underlining to draw attention to the relevant lines.

Your exact words:

But what's to understand about shutter speed that looking at the back of an open film camera (slr) and watching as you press the shutter release won't teach you?

Serious question.


My exact words:

Serious answer:

Relationship to flash synch.

Interaction between blind motion and moving subject. (eg shear of racing car with high shutter seed).

Actual effect of change of shutter seed with objects moving at different speeds at different distances.

Very slow shutter speeds and reciprocity failure if using film.


Your exact words:

For me those are all answered by watching the back of an opened camera. What else ya got?

#4 is more about the properties of the film though.



-------

You made a ludicrous statement, initially in response to my genuine answer to a genuine question, and you were called on it.

Trying to make out I misquoted you or twisted things is equally ludicrous as the above clearly shows.

It's not nit picking. What you said was completely absurd.

 

[VADER1775]

You flatter yourself.

You did not work out those things from scratch just by looking at an open camera.

Even then, just watching the shutter operate will tell you nothing about, for example, how varying shutter speeds affect the catured image of moving water.

Whatever, if someone still needs to read a basic book on exposure I think it's fair to assume that he may need a little help with these things.

What say you, OP?

I just asked a simple question.

 

[Blackbelt94]

http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/books/search?keywords=understanding exposure&pageSize=10

which one is it

 

[toofpaste]

The chick with the crazy hair knows what shes talking about.