How fast a shutter speed do you need for human "action" shots?

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Paul Ciszek, Sep 18, 2012.

  1. Paul Ciszek

    Paul Ciszek Guest

    I have been fiddling around with forcing one parameter, and letting the
    camera make up for it with the rest. What is a good shutter speed for
    sports-type shots, dancers, kids creating resonant modes on a slinky,
    that sort of thing?
     
    Paul Ciszek, Sep 18, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Paul Ciszek

    otter Guest

    You will need to experiment to see what you like.

    For volleyball, 1/1000 will freeze the ball and body. But I actually
    like the motion blur you get with the hands and ball at 1/200 or
    1/100.
     
    otter, Sep 18, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Paul Ciszek

    PeterN Guest

    It depends:
    1/2500 should be fast enough. Slower, ff you want a touch of blur,
    There is no set formula.
     
    PeterN, Sep 18, 2012
    #3
  4. Varies a lot. You'll almost certainly need 1/250. If you've got
    someone running *across* the frame fairly close, you'll need a LOT more
    if you want to freeze them.

    Remember that freezing them isn't always the best photo. Leaving blur
    in the moving arms and legs and getting the face sharp can be wonderful
    sometimes, for exmaple. And panning with the subject, to leave the
    background streaked but the key parts of the subject sharp, is also nice
    sometimes.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Sep 18, 2012
    #4
  5. Paul Ciszek

    Paul Ciszek Guest

    You mean, like this?

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/7914449074/in/set-72157631369048820/lightbox/
    That sounds extremely difficult to do, though I can see why it would look
    awesome if you succeeded.
     
    Paul Ciszek, Sep 19, 2012
    #5
  6. Yep, that kind of thing. Often much more interesting if you see a clear
    indication of the motion.
    It takes a critically-judged shutter speed. This is an area where
    digital makes it tremendously easier -- often you have time to determine
    that shutter speed by trial and error, whereas a film photographer
    simply had to know in advance (and it depends on the distance and focal
    length, angle to the lens view the subject is moving, etc.) And panning
    smoothly with the subject also takes some practice.

    These of mine <http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/2011/11050-pan/>
    are not very good examples; they were practice shots. But note in *-008
    for example that the face is quite sharp, the background is streaked,
    and not just the wheels but the feet on the pedals are blurred.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Sep 19, 2012
    #6
  7. Paul Ciszek

    Savageduck Guest

    Here are two examples of my automotive motion shots, one panning, and
    one @1/800 sec.
    < http://db.tt/jw8yChbw >
    < http://db.tt/cqweMEc3 >
     
    Savageduck, Sep 19, 2012
    #7
  8. Paul Ciszek

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Eric Stevens, Sep 19, 2012
    #8
  9. Paul Ciszek

    bugbear Guest

    1/250 th

    BugBear
     
    bugbear, Sep 19, 2012
    #9
  10. That's an absolutely classic pan. The fact that he was probably going
    faster than my test subjects helps give you a much more streaked
    background.
    That's actually a great example of just how static a really frozen shot
    can look.

    I had this discussion down in Nashville about helicopter blades at one
    point; same thing, if you really freeze it, it looks kind of wrong, and
    if you blur it so much you don't see the blades at all it looks REALLY
    wrong.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Sep 19, 2012
    #10
  11. Paul Ciszek

    Whisky-dave Guest

     
    Whisky-dave, Sep 19, 2012
    #11
  12.  
    David Dyer-Bennet, Sep 19, 2012
    #12
  13. Paul Ciszek

    PeterN Guest

    Here's one that I entered in the SI
    The face is almost sharp, but the figure has enough motion blur, that
    you can tell what's happening.

    <http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/133702219>
     
    PeterN, Sep 20, 2012
    #13
  14. Paul Ciszek

    PeterN Guest

    Nice capture on the pan. The freeze does nothing for me.
     
    PeterN, Sep 20, 2012
    #14
  15. Paul Ciszek

    PeterN Guest

    Yet a frozen shot need not look static.

    <http://peternewman.smugmug.com/Photography/public/21526966_dVBkNG#!i=1938395849&k=ZZBXTDp&lb=1&s=A>
     
    PeterN, Sep 20, 2012
    #15
  16. Paul Ciszek

    Savageduck Guest

    Track position is everything when it comes to working good pans. The
    "Corkscrew" at Laguna Seca presents problems since all good vantage
    points look up into the initial left turn and dive downhill and the
    cars (or bikes) go through the left, left, right turn aimed , ineffect
    directly at the photographers. This works wonderfully for video, but
    not so good for capturing a panning motion shot. So those shots imply
    the action by position, and stance on the track.
    Where you can position yourself at right angles to the direction of
    travel, you will find the panning works very well.
    Here are a bunch of shots taken at the "Corkscrew" and about 300 ft. below it.
    <
    https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lx56l61b7bbj1se/ZsHsiTueoW/Shared Images/Automotive/Laguna Seca Extras
     
    Savageduck, Sep 20, 2012
    #16
  17. Paul Ciszek

    Bryan Guest

    Bryan, Sep 20, 2012
    #17
  18. Paul Ciszek

    Whisky-dave Guest

     
    Whisky-dave, Sep 20, 2012
    #18
  19. Paul Ciszek

    PeterN Guest

    Sorry, still like the first. The others are good if you are presenting a
    pictorial on auto racing.
     
    PeterN, Sep 20, 2012
    #19
  20. I mean using electronic means in the sensor to control exposure
    duration, rather than a mechanical shutter.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Sep 20, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.