Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,566   Posts: 1,545,371   Online: 1022
      
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 57
  1. #11
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,367
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    Yes- the whole front of the locomotive is slightly blurred. I'd say the shutter speed was fast enough to keep the train en toto from blurring, but not fast enough to capture it as if it were standing still. Looks like the train gave a slight sideways lurch over an un-evenness in the tracks as it approached you.

  2. #12
    dpurdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portland OR USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,048
    Images
    38
    It looks to me like the light box up above the numbers has a double image as well.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Midlands, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    919
    Quote Originally Posted by summicron1 View Post
    the trees behind the engine in that close-up of the numbers don't show motion blur while the numbers and other details of the engine do.
    The tree isn't moving... I assume he's using a tripod, thus the background is still.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Plymouth, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    307
    I am so perplexed by this I am seriously considering visiting the main station area in the next couple of days to check it out.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Plymouth, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    307
    Yes the camera was on a heavy tripod, I am sure the camera itself did not move.

  6. #16
    Marc Akemann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor area, Michigan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,260
    Images
    4
    I agree there definitely is blur involved here but why are there two distinct sets of numbers? Blurry as they are.

    Marc

  7. #17
    Hatchetman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    623
    Images
    7
    I think it is motion blur. It's more obvious with the numbers because they show so much contrast. 35mm train shooters hope for minimum 1/500 if possible.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Midlands, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    919
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed Bray View Post
    I am so perplexed by this I am seriously considering visiting the main station area in the next couple of days to check it out.
    It really is quite simple, but nobody seems to be able to explain it adequately! I understand it in practice, but my physics is failing me. Another way of thinking about it is clouds - which generally move very fast indeed. On a windy day your foreground interest (a tree say) may show some motion blur from the wind, whereas the incredibly fast moving clouds above will retain detail. So it has to do with distance/time. The extreme example would be a plane flying at hundreds of miles an hour, yet it's much easier to freeze the motion of a plane flying at full speed several miles away than it is a slow plane coming in to land.

    An even more extreme example is the ISS, flying at 18,000 mph! With a telescope you may be able to photograph this much easier than a car passing in front of you at 30 mph.

  9. #19
    Hatchetman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    623
    Images
    7
    It is image speed across the film plane we are worried about.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Midlands, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    919
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatchetman View Post
    It is image speed across the film plane we are worried about.
    If he'd stepped back and altered his perspective there would be no motion blur because the distance between him, the front of the train and middle of the train where there is full detail would be adequate. This is causing the confusion. I'd like to see some kind of equation that explains this distance/subject speed problem. It's almost like hyperfocal but for moving subjects.
    Last edited by batwister; 08-27-2012 at 10:49 AM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin