| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/14/2008 09:39:40 AM · #51 |
So this means that the camera has to move during panning?
I saw some pics where the camera and the subject were in a "fixed" relation. THe background "moved" and got blurred. The spinning thing on playgrounds.
Now technically and with a narrow interpretaion, this would NOT be panning? |
|
|
|
02/14/2008 09:50:49 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by HeiSch:
So this means that the camera has to move during panning?
I saw some pics where the camera and the subject were in a "fixed" relation. THe background "moved" and got blurred. The spinning thing on playgrounds.
Now technically and with a narrow interpretaion, this would NOT be panning? |
Personally, I think the challenge/fun to panning is the degree of difficulty in being able to move the camera in sync with the subject to get a good result. I don't see much difficulty/challenge in fixing a camera and subject together and moving the background. I have kids and have done it...it's certainly fun! :-)
The material is there for review/study and the interpretation is obviously subjective...so the question of what is and is not panning should be best answered on a personal basis IMO. |
|
|
|
02/14/2008 11:40:07 AM · #53 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Ah yes, but there's more to that article that addresses panning as used in photography rather than filming (movies, etc...). Such as:
|
I'm just having fun arguing now, but what if I'm shooting a Mark III on burst mode at 10 fps? Is that some quasi-world where I'm sorta panning? To differentiate between photography and video is sorta silly on the wiki article's part. After all, the video camera is simply taking pictures at 24 fps. |
|
|
|
02/14/2008 11:52:51 AM · #54 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by HeiSch:
So this means that the camera has to move during panning?
I saw some pics where the camera and the subject were in a "fixed" relation. THe background "moved" and got blurred. The spinning thing on playgrounds.
Now technically and with a narrow interpretaion, this would NOT be panning? |
Personally, I think the challenge/fun to panning is the degree of difficulty in being able to move the camera in sync with the subject to get a good result. I don't see much difficulty/challenge in fixing a camera and subject together and moving the background. I have kids and have done it...it's certainly fun! :-)
The material is there for review/study and the interpretation is obviously subjective...so the question of what is and is not panning should be best answered on a personal basis IMO. |
I would agree with this. In scoring this challenge, I gave more points to a shot that was obviously more difficult (like using a longer shutter speed). Panning with a shutter speed of 1/500 would give you a nice sharp subject, but also kills the effect that panning is trying to achieve. For me personally, I give more kudos to the longer exposure times, even if it means the subject is not as sharp because it is more difficult and challenging to get right. |
|
|
|
02/14/2008 11:56:15 AM · #55 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'm just having fun arguing now, but what if I'm shooting a Mark III on burst mode at 10 fps? Is that some quasi-world where I'm sorta panning? To differentiate between photography and video is sorta silly on the wiki article's part. After all, the video camera is simply taking pictures at 24 fps. |
Just having fun arguing back...
First of all it's a wiki (sorry, that's the librarian in me coming out, lol), but that aside... Video panning is a different animal (except for the fact that a moving camera is used in both techniques, I almost say they were mearely homophones). When a script has the direction "pan in to a man riding a horse" it is not anything like a still photography shot (using panning) of a man on a horse. Even if you looked at each frame of the video, it wouldn't be the same - you might get frames w/ the background blurred, but just because you didn't doesn't mean the technique wasn't used.
And don't even get me started on the "pan and scan" idiocy to make movies fit the tv screen. |
|
|
|
02/14/2008 12:47:57 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'm just having fun arguing now, but what if I'm shooting a Mark III on burst mode at 10 fps? Is that some quasi-world where I'm sorta panning? To differentiate between photography and video is sorta silly on the wiki article's part. After all, the video camera is simply taking pictures at 24 fps. |
Hmmm...well, if you're shooting at 10 fps then the shutter speed has to be pretty darn high. To accomplish a panning effect at that speed (blurred bg, identifiable subject) you'd need to be on a train shooting out the window at a car traveling parallel to the train track (or in another car on the same road). Just an example. In any case the camera is certainly in a fixed position then and not be "panned" by the photographer IMO.
Good food for debate however. :-D
ETA - wait a sec. 10 fps could be accomplished at 1/10 shutter speed. That's not so fast. :-/
Message edited by author 2008-02-14 12:49:27. |
|
|
|
02/14/2008 01:29:36 PM · #57 |
Don't think I don't appreciate your position. I agree that a more traditional definition of "panning" for photography is exactly as you describe (and exactly what I used). I'm just trying to be a little more open. "Pan" is used the the world of capturing images in other ways and I like to try to be a little more inclusive in the challenges to allow for other interpretations.
BTW, 1/40th, according to my score, can accomplish quite a bit of motion blur. Like you noted, the Mark III could easily take 10 photos at 1/40th in a second. Unfortunately though, I don't have a Mark III. :) |
|
|
|
02/14/2008 06:25:46 PM · #58 |
| I am glad I sparked so much discussion on what panning is. Looking at the challenge photos it's clear that many attempted to pan but others really knew what it means to pan. After reading the comments by everyone I have a better understanding of how to take a photo using this method. I did rate photos according to panning techniques described in this forum. Thanks for helping me out!! |
|
|
|
02/14/2008 07:45:28 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by HeiSch:
So this means that the camera has to move during panning?
I saw some pics where the camera and the subject were in a "fixed" relation. THe background "moved" and got blurred. The spinning thing on playgrounds.
Now technically and with a narrow interpretaion, this would NOT be panning? |
I think this is where some confusion enters due to imprecise language (not that normal people should care about the precise definition of panning). Shots from a merry-go-round, from parallel moving vehicles, and those following a moving subject from a standing point have these two things in common:
1) They ALL involve motion of the camera with respect to the background
2) Any parts of the subject that are sharp must maintain a relatively "fixed" relationship with the camera while the shutter is open (otherwise they would be much less sharp wouldn't they?)
Here's the key question for me from this discussion:
Should it matter if the fixed relationship on the subject is based on parallel motion (vehicles moving in tandem) or rotational motion behind an axis (merry-go-round) or rotational motion on an axis (on a tripod or freehand)? My impression so far is that all of these should technically be called panning, otherwise the definition needs refinement to include reference to an axis of rotation, but I'm no expert.
On a related topic:
Should "degree of difficulty" factor into scoring? Well, that's obviously a personal thing, but in the short time I have been on DPC I have seen many excellent images take the top spot that were far more simple than those below them. For me, if the challenge has been met I am judging on the merits of the finished product.
A 10 is a 10. I'm not going to mark a photo down because the photographer didn't choose the most difficult method to shoot his 10. These "degree of difficulty" considerations should be included in the challenge descrition if people are supposed to score based on such things.... "Details: Create an effective photo using the technique of panning. Don't use devices to move the camera other than movement on a tripod or by hand (no pictures from vehicles, merry-go-rounds, or escalators)." Of course, that doesn't rule out a bungee cord pan shot!
|
|
|
|
02/14/2008 08:58:40 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by marttila:
... Shots from a merry-go-round, from parallel moving vehicles, and those following a moving subject from a standing point have these two things in common:
1) They ALL involve motion of the camera with respect to the background
... |
Actually, they should all involve motion of the camera with respect to the subject. That's the fun (and tricky) part of panning in photography IMO. :-)
PCPhoto Magazine - Trick Shots: Action
Originally posted by PCPhoto Magazine article:
"It’s important that you move the camera continuously through the exposure. Start panning the camera with the subject before you press the shutter, then keep moving the camera even after the shutter has closed. It’s important that you don’t stop suddenly—you’ll get odd patterns in the blurs." |
Panning In Motorsport Photography
Originally posted by Panning In Motorsport Photography article:
"The technique is positioning the subject in the viewfinder of the camera and trying to keep it in that same position as the subject moves past you. While you are following the subject in the viewfinder, squeeze the shutter release. Do not jab, as this will upset a smooth rotational motion and make everything blurred. Follow through with your turning motion until after the shutter operates to make sure you do not change your turning speed while the shutter is open." |
|
|
|
|
02/14/2008 09:10:49 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Actually, they should all involve motion of the camera with respect to the subject. That's the fun (and tricky) part of panning in photography IMO. :-) |
It *is* tricky. I went out and played with the technique a few times and it took awhile to accurately match my panning motion with my subjects, and I was mostly shooting things that were moving at a constant rate of speed (like cars). I have enormous respect for people who got panning shots of erratically moving living things, though I also appreciate a good shot of anything in motion with this technique. It may come naturally to some folks but I think I'm more a stop-action kind of gal. Somewhat less coordination required (just a quick trigger finger).
Definitely enjoyed playing with the technique, but didn't end up with anything creative enough to enter. I did freak out a few people during rush hour, so that was reward enough ;-) |
|
|
|
02/14/2008 09:38:53 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by marttila:
... Shots from a merry-go-round, from parallel moving vehicles, and those following a moving subject from a standing point have these two things in common:
1) They ALL involve motion of the camera with respect to the background
... |
Actually, they should all involve motion of the camera with respect to the subject. That's the fun (and tricky) part of panning in photography IMO. :-)
|
To be clear, "motion with respect to the background" means the background is moving across the frame, and hense it is blurring. The goal of a panning shot is to do that, blur the background with motion, while keeping the main subject relatively sharp (arguments about "pan" vs "motion pan" aside for the moment). Sharpness can only be kept if the subject does not move relative to the frame. That necessarily involves moving the camera which brings me to my earlier question:
Does it matter if the camera follows the subject on an axis, moving on or along an opposing spoke, or moving parallel to the subject? The references to motion in those articles don't specify that the photographer must keep his/her feet on the Earth to pivot on an axis. |
|
|
|
02/14/2008 10:11:31 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by marttila:
... The references to motion in those articles don't specify that the photographer must keep his/her feet on the Earth to pivot on an axis. |
LOL :-D No, I guess technically they don't.
Tips about continuing to move the camera with the subject after pressing the shutter (follow thru) does sound like the photographer is maintaining control over the camera and it's movement. Mentioning how moving vehicles are easier to track and stay with than something that moves more erratically, etc...
One would be hard pressed to read the articles and come away with the impression that the camera and the subject are to be fixed together and then moved (spun, etc...). And personally, I don't believe that is within the general spirit of panning photography nor the spirit as addressed at DPC currently.
All JMO of course. :-) |
|
|
|
02/15/2008 12:23:34 AM · #64 |
The previous articles say to, "Simply move the camera with the subject as it moves, taking the picture as the camera is moving" and the other says "The basic object of panning while photographing cars, is keeping the camera pointed at the same spot on a moving car, while the shutter is open." I don't see that they exclude techniques other than swinging the camera with your arm or monopod. More importantly, those articles are basic tutorials for simple panning techniques, not definitive guides to panning.
How does it violate the spirit of this challenge to take panning shots when that is exactly what the challenge is about? If panning is only the technique of moving the camera with your arms to follow an object then there is a valid complaint about several entries. If panning is the effect of moving the camera to keep a subject in focus while motion blurring the background, then most of the entries in this challenge are on solid footing. Besides, if I had entered this challenge and really wanted to violate the spirit of it, I would create a good blurry panned background, print it, then taken pictures of a model ufo in front of the panned print. ;)
By the way, I don't have a horse in this race. If I did, it would be too blurry! :P |
|
|
|
02/15/2008 05:50:48 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by marttila:
... I would create a good blurry panned background, print it, then taken pictures of a model ufo in front of the panned print. ;) |
Hey, I like that idea :D |
|
|
|
02/15/2008 06:22:24 PM · #66 |
I spent some time trying to figure out the Art of Panning and how to use this technique to achieve my goal of capturing an object and create a sense of....WHOOOSH! (I'm full of technical language today). It seems to me the art of panning is really about the art of the shutterspeed purely because I end up fiddling with the shutterspeed quite a bit given the lighting of my target and the overall environment. I guess I did okay since I don't have a DNMC comment (yet) on my entry. Personally, I think panning is extremely frustrating and simultaneously a HUGE amount of fun because the results can be so dramatic and sometimes quite unexpected. The whole process becomes so highly interactive with the objects (including myself) all dancing in motion. Of course, the Art of Manual Focus challenged me as well on this particular entry...YIKES!
Well, that's my two cents...;-) |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:04:27 AM · #67 |
| Whew 40 more to go for 100% comments. It has been a marathon today. I have not been able to vote in a while so I thought I would get it out of my system. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:17:46 AM · #68 |
Originally posted by Jason_Cross:
Whew 40 more to go for 100% comments. It has been a marathon today. I have not been able to vote in a while so I thought I would get it out of my system. |
Jason, thanks for your comment - appreciate it. Good to know what others think of the image though it may not be scoring that great. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:35:02 AM · #69 |
| I was a little hard on this challenge. There was some good ones, but many of them were just so/so. Lots of potential in most of them however. I am thinking that there might have been some last minute entries. |
|
|
|
02/20/2008 02:13:54 PM · #70 |
*****
Now that this challenge has ended, what was the difference between "Panning" and "Motion Panning?" It seems to me it was another motion panning challenge, perhaps with a little less emphasis on catching the entire moving subject.
PS: Originally posted by kleski:
I am glad I sparked so much discussion on what panning is. |
Huh?
Message edited by author 2008-02-20 14:19:16. |
|
|
|
02/20/2008 02:28:19 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by citymars:
*****
Now that this challenge has ended, what was the difference between "Panning" and "Motion Panning?" It seems to me it was another motion panning challenge, perhaps with a little less emphasis on catching the entire moving subject.
|
I'd consider "motion panning" to simply be a subset of "panning" in general. You could use panning, for example, to generate an abstract photo (which doesn't imply motion as much as it generates interesting colors and/or geometries.)
I think the challenge description was simply "panning" because of the play on words in the challenges. (Bread-pan)
Message edited by author 2008-02-20 14:28:40.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2008 02:33:35 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think the challenge description was simply "panning" because of the play on words in the challenges. (Bread-pan) |
Ah. Cute. And then if you end up with the brown ribbon, your photo has truly been panned.*
*(apologies if this pun has already been used). |
|
|
|
02/20/2008 02:34:57 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by HeiSch:
So this means that the camera has to move during panning?
I saw some pics where the camera and the subject were in a "fixed" relation. THe background "moved" and got blurred. The spinning thing on playgrounds.
Now technically and with a narrow interpretaion, this would NOT be panning? |
I'd define that as panning too. Panning happens when the camera moves, relative the earth. Seems like a reasonable definition that fits all the cases. If the camera is moved by the photographer, or the photographer and camera is moved, it seems to the same thing. In the case you describe, the camera is moved, while the playground wheel rotates.
In the same vein, I think this is a form of panning too:
|
|
|
|
02/20/2008 02:35:52 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by kleski:
So is riding a merry go round panning?? |
IMO, no. Camera isn't be moved (panned) - besides, it's too easy. :-D |
I'd disagree. Of course the camera is moving. Therefore, it is panning, particularly if you use a slow enough shutter speed to demonstrate that fact.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2008 02:37:14 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'm just having fun arguing now, but what if I'm shooting a Mark III on burst mode at 10 fps? Is that some quasi-world where I'm sorta panning? To differentiate between photography and video is sorta silly on the wiki article's part. After all, the video camera is simply taking pictures at 24 fps. |
You could always just change the wiki article. Some other random photographer did in the first place. That's why it isn't any use as a definitive source for anything.
|
|
