A few more from Sebring

[John Thawley]

Here are a few more favorites from the 12 Hours of Sebring.


http://www.trackbytes.com/picture/thaw_266045.jpg?pictureId=2025011
http://www.trackbytes.com/picture/thaw_266621.jpg?pictureId=2025004
http://www.trackbytes.com/picture/thaw_268074.jpg?pictureId=2025057
http://www.trackbytes.com/picture/thaw_270473.jpg?pictureId=2024991
http://www.trackbytes.com/picture/thaw_271058.jpg?pictureId=2024978
http://www.trackbytes.com/picture/thaw_270720.jpg?pictureId=2024987
http://www.trackbytes.com/picture/thaw_271352.jpg?pictureId=2024977
http://www.trackbytes.com/picture/thaw_270945.jpg?pictureId=2024981

[Apexer]

Love em all!! I wish i could have been there - thank gawd for SPEED.

Quick question - On number 5 - Ive seen others as well that are sharp in the center, and soft/motion blur on ends of the car. What causes this ? i have an idea, but would like a definitive answer.

Number 3 - calendar material.

I just saw your gallery in "Wheels on Walls" The CTS-V shots are phenomenal, the perspective was hot. Love that car.

[John Thawley]

Love em all!! I wish i could have been there - thank gawd for SPEED.

Quick question - On number 5 - Ive seen others as well that are sharp in the center, and soft/motion blur on ends of the car. What causes this ? i have an idea, but would like a definitive answer.

Number 3 - calendar material.

I just saw your gallery in "Wheels on Walls" The CTS-V shots are phenomenal, the perspective was hot. Love that car.

Well... I will tell you my interpretation. You will get people that want to give you all the geometrical jargon etc. etc. ... but simply put, it's a bit of a geometric phenomenon based on the angle of the car's path as it relates to the face of the lens... or more accurately, the face of the film/sensor.

Only objects traveling perfectly parallel to the lens face or film plane can remain sharp. So, if you are panning left to right, you are actually moving in a modified arc. Now the car is coming at you at an angle.

Keeping in mind that the camera "reads" the front of the car as traveling at a quicker rate of speed than the back of the car, what remains sharp will depend on what part of the car is perfectly parallel to the face of the lens as you are moving through your pan. Hence, the reason we miss. :)

Just put the lines of paper. Draw your arc and draw the line of travel (angle) of the car. What our goal as photographers is, is to have that intersection happen where and when WE want it ot happen. Obviously, that's not always the case.

In a perfect world, you'd want the car to seem to fixed to the end of a pole that is attached to your lens. You move... the car moves with you.

Now, the slower the shutter, the more those soft areas will become apparent. The "perfect" spot or the interesction of your arc and the cars travel is less because the aperture/shutter is open longer. That's why we call it dragging the shutter... the visual is slurred or blurred.

So a faster shutter speed can cure some of the effect... but also change the look of the image. My personal taste is an exaggerated slow shutter... and let the blur work for you. But it's personal taste.

This entry on my blog might give you more insight on how I approach it. Just keep in mind, other opinions may differ. This is what works for me:

http://www.johnthawley.com/journal/2008/8/18/the-pan-shot-taking-control.html

[Xtralight]

I really love your pictures! Your panning technique blog very interesting.

[Apexer]

Well... I will tell you my interpretation. You will get people that want to give you all the geometrical jargon etc. etc. ... but simply put, it's a bit of a geometric phenomenon based on the angle of the car's path as it relates to the face of the lens... or more accurately, the face of the film/sensor.

Only objects traveling perfectly parallel to the lens face or film plane can remain sharp. So, if you are panning left to right, you are actually moving in a modified arc. Now the car is coming at you at an angle.

Keeping in mind that the camera "reads" the front of the car as traveling at a quicker rate of speed than the back of the car, what remains sharp will depend on what part of the car is perfectly parallel to the face of the lens as you are moving through your pan. Hence, the reason we miss.

Just put the lines of paper. Draw your arc and draw the line of travel (angle) of the car. What our goal as photographers is, is to have that intersection happen where and when WE want it ot happen. Obviously, that's not always the case.

In a perfect world, you'd want the car to seem to fixed to the end of a pole that is attached to your lens. You move... the car moves with you.

Now, the slower the shutter, the more those soft areas will become apparent. The "perfect" spot or the interesction of your arc and the cars travel is less because the aperture/shutter is open longer. That's why we call it dragging the shutter... the visual is slurred or blurred.

So a faster shutter speed can cure some of the effect... but also change the look of the image. My personal taste is an exaggerated slow shutter... and let the blur work for you. But it's personal taste.

This entry on my blog might give you more insight on how I approach it. Just keep in mind, other opinions may differ. This is what works for me:

Thank you, you are too kind with your time. I'll be honest - I wasn't very close as to my idea of what caused the issue. I'm learnin' though.

Your images are inspiring - thanks again.

[KevB]

These are outstanding. Great work.

Kev