| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/17/2007 05:11:50 PM · #51 |
ROFL.....I did the same...Lol. Hit hard on DNMC...Lol... Well, at least one of the many comments thought it was cool..
Originally posted by soup:
well i tried something a bit experimental with my entry, and am paying the price. though i can't really complain as i had a feeling my experiment would fail... ;}
i would say though, that if the image appears to be motion panning the photographer succeeded whether or not the camera was panned. there is usually more than one path to the same end. |
|
|
|
|
01/17/2007 05:58:19 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by ace flyman:
ROFL.....I did the same...Lol. Hit hard on DNMC...Lol... Well, at least one of the many comments thought it was cool..
Originally posted by soup:
well i tried something a bit experimental with my entry, and am paying the price. though i can't really complain as i had a feeling my experiment would fail... ;}
i would say though, that if the image appears to be motion panning the photographer succeeded whether or not the camera was panned. there is usually more than one path to the same end. |
|
and again, the important thing which a lot of people are missing is that the camera is panned, and not how it is panned - by hands, by servo motor, by truck, or whatever
Message edited by author 2007-01-17 17:59:57.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2007 06:03:10 PM · #53 |
Went to bed at 50 votes and 6.7. Awoke to:
Votes: 124
Views: 190
Avg Vote: 6.4032
Comments: 4
Ho hum....
|
|
|
|
01/17/2007 07:13:38 PM · #54 |
I spent about 10 minutes studying one particular photo that I gave a score of 10 along side with a second photo that received 10 too. The second photo is a typical motion panning shot; the camera is locked to a speeding traveling object that should look sharp depending on the ability of the photographer or the technique to hold the equipment steady relative to the moving object and to keep the intended object in one place in the view finder, and at the same time causing the background to appear blurred, and that means "motion blur like" background, were the direction of the blur lines are parallel to each other and go along with the directional movement of the camera(equipment).
Now, the blur in the first photo (disputed) which should have been a "motion blur like" due to the movement of the camera against a standstill background was anything but "motion blur like", and the background had all kinds of blur and directional movement because the back ground itself was a moving one and the subject was 100% net because it was 100% immobile.
I can't elaborate much more on this disputed shot, in fear I will have made it so clear which photo I am talking about. The thing is I wanted to know how the shot was taken while keeping the subject safe in the heart of all the background movement, AND I think I did.
Finally I am not a DNMC Nazi but this is DNMC 1.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2007 07:57:04 PM · #55 |
Votes: 138
Views: 262
Avg Vote: 5.7754
Comments: 9
One comment says its "underwhelming", another gives it a 10 and says its "absolutely perfect".... Another confounding week at DPC! :)
|
|
|
|
01/17/2007 07:59:28 PM · #56 |
| *off to vote ten to all underwhelming photos, just because* |
|
|
|
01/17/2007 07:59:54 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by alfresco:
*off to vote ten to all underwhelming photos, just because* |
LOL That's what I like about you, JP! :)
|
|
|
|
01/17/2007 08:11:10 PM · #58 |
I spent about 10 minutes studying one particular photo that I gave a score of 10 along side with a second photo that received 10 too. The second photo is a typical motion panning shot; the camera is locked to a speeding traveling object that should look sharp depending on the ability of the photographer or the technique to hold the equipment steady relative to the moving object and to keep the intended object in one place in the view finder, and at the same time causing the background to appear blurred, and that means "motion blur like" background, were the direction of the blur lines are parallel to each other and go along with the directional movement of the camera(equipment).
Now, the blur in the first photo (disputed) which should have been a "motion blur like" due to the movement of the camera against a standstill background was anything but "motion blur like", and the background had all kinds of blur and directional movement because the back ground itself was a moving one and the subject was 100% net because it was 100% immobile.
I can't elaborate much more on this disputed shot, in fear I will have made it so clear which photo I am talking about. The thing is I wanted to know how the shot was taken while keeping the subject safe in the heart of all the background movement, AND I think I did.
Finally I am not a DNMC Nazi but this is DNMC 1.
Wow!
Now there's voting commitment
Votes: 137
Views: 205
Avg Vote: 6.5693
Comments: 4
Favorites: 1
|
|
|
|
01/17/2007 09:19:43 PM · #59 |
I think 'the thing' most important in a challenge is its SPIRIT. Technically a motion blur can be acheived by 4 ways
- Moving the camera on its axis (in whichever direction) while focusing on a moving subject
- Holding/fixing the camera position but moving the whole camera along with the subject
- Holding the camera and the subject but moving the backgroud (well i dunno what expert photographers think about this one but i tried this too and NO i am not playing in this challenge)
- In PS or any image editing
Now if you shoot your subject sitting against the the window of a moving car, it doesnt become a panning shot. Panning should and MUST include motion of the camera on is axis, whatever and however anyone can try to justify it but thats the bottom line i guess |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 12:36:33 AM · #60 |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 01:20:23 AM · #61 |
Jeez, what's going on? I was sitting on 6.7+ at 50 votes and have been on an inexorable slide ever since. Currently:
Votes: 154
Views: 235
Avg Vote: 6.3377
Comments: 4
Favorites: 1
Oh well, I guess the one 'fav' is nice. :) |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 02:30:44 AM · #62 |
Originally posted by TIHadi:
I spent about 10 minutes studying one particular photo that I gave a score of 10 along side with a second photo that received 10 too. The second photo is a typical motion panning shot; the camera is locked to a speeding traveling object that should look sharp depending on the ability of the photographer or the technique to hold the equipment steady relative to the moving object and to keep the intended object in one place in the view finder, and at the same time causing the background to appear blurred, and that means "motion blur like" background, were the direction of the blur lines are parallel to each other and go along with the directional movement of the camera(equipment).
Now, the blur in the first photo (disputed) which should have been a "motion blur like" due to the movement of the camera against a standstill background was anything but "motion blur like", and the background had all kinds of blur and directional movement because the back ground itself was a moving one and the subject was 100% net because it was 100% immobile.
I can't elaborate much more on this disputed shot, in fear I will have made it so clear which photo I am talking about. The thing is I wanted to know how the shot was taken while keeping the subject safe in the heart of all the background movement, AND I think I did.
Finally I am not a DNMC Nazi but this is DNMC 1. |
While the technical information I offered regarding motion panning is correct, I may have been previously wrong in reassessing one particular image which I described in the previous post as (disputed). I am giving that photo the benefit of doubt and going back to the previous score I gave a 10. Good luck
|
|
|
|
01/18/2007 10:51:09 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by Qiki:
Jeez, what's going on? I was sitting on 6.7+ at 50 votes and have been on an inexorable slide ever since. Currently:
Votes: 154
Views: 235
Avg Vote: 6.3377
Comments: 4
Favorites: 1
Oh well, I guess the one 'fav' is nice. :) |
Same here.. I thought I was ready for a Second Best Ever - at 6.5+ and climbing with 130 votes in, then since last night I have slipped to 6.27 with 171 votes!!! Oh well, I guess the picture changed some time during the night
|
|
|
|
01/18/2007 01:02:30 PM · #64 |
LOL, I just love the roller coaster ride too!
With 40 votes I was at my high of 7.5 which went down to a low of 6.5. currently I am climbing back up:
Votes: 187
Views: 326
Avg Vote: 6.6631
Comments: 21
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 01/18/07 12:59 pm
Message edited by author 2007-01-18 13:04:27. |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 01:39:58 PM · #65 |
Votes: 194
Views: 348
Avg Vote: 7.0206
Comments: 16
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 01/18/07 01:36 pm
|
|
|
|
01/18/2007 04:36:04 PM · #66 |
Well I'm struggling big time - down from a 5.7 to a 5.3 and freefalling :-(
I think I might be a sad bunny if I get trounced by a load of shots that have focussed on motion blur instead of motion panning . . .
There are still some great motion panning shots out there though. |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 05:15:05 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by Jedusi:
Well I'm struggling big time - down from a 5.7 to a 5.3 and freefalling :-(
I think I might be a sad bunny if I get trounced by a load of shots that have focussed on motion blur instead of motion panning . . .
There are still some great motion panning shots out there though. |
I think we need to create a club, because mine has done exactly the same!! Bit miffed about one comment tho...I beleive that the DNMC society is alive and well. Maybe we should change DPC to Text book photography challange |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 05:55:03 PM · #68 |
| I have never had a score just keep on sliding the way this one is. From 6.7+ at 50 votes (and looking like I could maybe be on the way to a new PB) to 6.2 now. It just keeps on falling! What's going on here??? |
|
|
|
01/18/2007 06:38:38 PM · #69 |
I think there is some serious trolling going on.
Mine is dropping as well....& no comments..GRRRRRR |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 06:06:31 AM · #70 |
seems my score is also sliding away, at 110 voyes, it was 7.2273
Votes: 223
Views: 409
Avg Vote: 6.9776
Comments: 17
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 01/19/07 04:49 am
will be my first 6+, so I will be happy with a personal best.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 06:47:50 AM · #71 |
Originally posted by Grandad:
seems my score is also sliding away, at 110 voyes, it was 7.2273
Votes: 223
Views: 409
Avg Vote: 6.9776
Comments: 17
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 01/19/07 04:49 am
will be my first 6+, so I will be happy with a personal best. |
I'd still be rather surprised if you don't end up with a ribbon with a score like that. Lookin' very good.... |
|
|
|
01/19/2007 07:42:37 AM · #72 |
Isn't it a bit coincidental that so many people have had their scores dropped by .3!!!! I have also dropped by .3
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 09:18:22 AM · #73 |
Originally posted by Qiki:
Originally posted by Grandad:
seems my score is also sliding away, at 110 voyes, it was 7.2273
Votes: 223
Views: 409
Avg Vote: 6.9776
Comments: 17
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 01/19/07 04:49 am
will be my first 6+, so I will be happy with a personal best. |
I'd still be rather surprised if you don't end up with a ribbon with a score like that. Lookin' very good.... |
I have not been a member for very long, les than three months in fact, so I’m not sure what to expect, I looked back at the last motion pan challenge, the top three were all 7.1, so when I saw 7.2 on my shot, I started getting my hopes up, there are a few really good shots out there, so only time will tell, but thanks for the words of encouragement.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 10:04:37 AM · #74 |
Votes: 204
Views: 297
Avg Vote: 4.4559
Comments: 8
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 01/19/07 10:02 am
|
|
|
|
01/19/2007 10:56:10 AM · #75 |
Votes: 217
Views: 329
Avg Vote: 4.6820
Comments: 10
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 01/19/07
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 08:09:31 PM EDT.
