Techniques for improving rolling shots?

[Jeff Boerio]

So JT's recent posts of rolling shots has me looking at my own thinking of how bad I am at getting a good shot at a slow shutter speed.

Here's my shining example:

http://www.rockinbdigital.com/tmp/naykid_roller0001.JPG

It got a lot of mileage, and was used in a number of places. The shutter speed was 1/60. It was a fluke. Everything else I shot at that shutter speed was junk. I shot from the bed of a pickup truck.

What are some techniques I can try to improve this?

Is that the vehicle of choice? Should I look for something else?

Thanks for the input.

Jeff

[Jacob Leveton]

there are things you can do to improve the sense of speed... some include:
- having elements on the ground which add speed by being blurred (race curbing, lane stripes, center dividers, etc)
- having elements in the background which are blurred
- wider angle shots will give you more blur
- the lower to the ground you are, the more blurred it will be

I think your angle hurt the shot. I would have had the cars heading towards the bottom left corner of the frame instead of the upper left corner.

[Dustin Finn]

Although I never have done any rolling shots... my thoughts are also about the light. Something we cannot always control with timing and schedules, but both of the shots John has posted look like they are in morning/afternoon light, adding adding a soft light, creating shadow gives an image depth and punch.

It would also help to get a background thats a bit further away in order to seperate the car a bit.

Just something I was thinking about - not sure if you were either.

[Mark Scheuern]

This is something I've only done a few times and I want to improve my technique, too. I enjoy seeing examples. Here are a couple of mine from a recent shoot. Wide and low, with objects close by on the sides of the road, works well, though too low can be a problem if you're shooting more than one car. I agree that the beautiful lighting in John's shots really stands out. Low side lighting does nice things for the road texture and looks good on the cars, too.

In both of these shots of mine I would prefer the cars closer to the camera. I'd motion for them to close in, they'd do it for a few seconds, then drop back. In retrospect, I should have emphasized the need to follow unusually close when I talked to them beforehand. (And yeah, I know about the front license plate; this was a very quick and impromptu shoot but no excuse.)

The speed was around 25 to 30 MPH and the shutter speed around 1/30 s. I had frustratingly many shots that were almost sharp. The road was very smooth but there was still a surprising amount of up and down motion that was hard to control.

Great hilarity ensued when the hatch blew closed on my head. I shot these from the back of my Saab 900 and I tested Vmax before hand but failed to account for the slight headwind.

http://www.scheuern.com/mini/motd07/mgsmotd0711m.jpg


http://www.scheuern.com/mini/motd07/mgsmotd0713m.jpg

[John Thawley]

I've found the best combination of speed and shutter is 40/40 - 40 mph and 1/40 sec. I use a 17- 40mm

Couple of things I've read here that I don't agree with.

Too low of an angle will lose the driver, the roof.. and/or give you too much wheel or bumper.

Early or late light is definitely better. Just keep in mind, you're chasing your own shadow. I'm typically on a closed course and doing a "circle"... so I get all kinds of lighting variables. If I had my choice, I would find a long straight run with the light where I want it and do it over and over.

You MUST shoot a lot. Keeper rate is not an issue. Getting a handful to choose from is the key. Communicate with the driver. Get them to understand what you are doing.... pull up CLOSE... move left, move right... but not too far. Jeff's first example could have been done from the side of the road. It's lost the car-to-car effect.

Shoot in bursts... and keep moving keep trying. If you see your shadow is coming across the shot or on the target car, take a break and let the camera's buffer catch up.

JT

[Mark Scheuern]

Yeah, even though the inside of my car's luggage compartment isn't terribly roomy, I found it wasn't hard to vary the shots by moving around within what space I had. I didn't have a lot of choice with the lateral placement of the vehicles themselves since we were on an open public road. It's definitely something I'd like to try on a track where there would be much more of a chance for control, more room to play with, and traveling the full circle of lighting. Though I suppose the downside of tracks is they tend to not have objects nearby aside from curbs and walls.

Definitely agree about the need to shoot a lot. Shoot what you think is way too much and then do that number again.

[Bill Jurasz]

I wonder if an image stabilized lens would help with the bouncy roads or not. Or a gyro like used in airplane shots. I've never shot car-to-car but I have a suction cup for on-car shots and one thing I've noticed is you really only get motion blur on the edges of the photo, not in the center. So wide angle is probably crucial.

On Mark's shots I would suggest a CP, cut the windshield glare, let me see the driver. Nice Vipers Jeff! Maybe add balast to the pick-up bed to make its ride smoother for you?

[Bob Chapman]

I've found the best combination of speed and shutter is 40/40 - 40 mph and 1/40 sec...
JT

40/40? I like 40/15 better. To get steady, anchor your chin against your chest and the base of the camera against your shoulder.

http://www.autosportimage.com/misc_photography/2006_excellence/20061024_a_8130_web.jpg

[Mark Scheuern]

On Mark's shots I would suggest a CP, cut the windshield glare, let me see the driver. Nice Vipers Jeff! Maybe add balast to the pick-up bed to make its ride smoother for you?

Yeah, good point. I cautioned the drivers to try not to stare directly at me and they ended up getting totally obscured anyway. And I was using an ND to allow slow shutter speeds in the sunny part, anyway, I might as well have used the CP instead.

Really nice shot, Bob. You were shooting over the top of the windshield? It seems that even with your bracing technique, which I'll have to try, you'd still have the problem of the car and your entire body bouncing up and down a bit, plus the buffeting from the wind.

[Bob Chapman]

Really nice shot, Bob. You were shooting over the top of the windshield? It seems that even with your bracing technique, which I'll have to try, you'd still have the problem of the car and your entire body bouncing up and down a bit, plus the buffeting from the wind.

I was standing on the passenger seat with my torso out of the sunroof. Actually, the front of the 911 was bouncing more than I was. ...typical of 911s. But, you're right, there's no getting around a little bounce.

[John Thawley]

40/40? I like 40/15 better. To get steady, anchor your chin against your chest and the base of the camera against your shoulder.


I didn't have the luxury of a do-over, and, as stated earlier, I was out of overhead on the aperture end of things. It was 1/40th at f/22 - no options.

[John Thawley]

I wonder if an image stabilized lens would help with the bouncy roads or not. Or a gyro like used in airplane shots. I've never shot car-to-car but I have a suction cup for on-car shots and one thing I've noticed is you really only get motion blur on the edges of the photo, not in the center. So wide angle is probably crucial.

On Mark's shots I would suggest a CP, cut the windshield glare, let me see the driver. Nice Vipers Jeff! Maybe add balast to the pick-up bed to make its ride smoother for you?

Image stabilizer? LOL - stop reading advertising brochures. Sure, it might give you an extra shot or two... but we're talking about getting thrown around... BoUnCe not bump. :)

Polarizer is not a good idea unless your're going to run straight line over and over. In a lapping situation, your moving around in the light with too much variable. You'd start getting the oil slick effect on the glass and such.

The one thing to remember when you shoot this kind of shot is a.) you must shoot a lot to get a few. b.) the sun isn't where you want it when you want it. c.) the background isn't constant

The end result is, you get a good sharp shot of the car at the angle you want and s.) the lighting sucks. b.) the background sucks. c.) your shadow is in the shot ... and so on and so on.

But, they're worth the hassle.

JT

[Morgan J Segal]

Image stabilizer? LOL - stop reading advertising brochures. Sure, it might give you an extra shot or two... but we're talking about getting thrown around... BoUnCe not bump. :)



In-lens stabilization may not help, but I use a gyroscope and it helps a lot. It significantly increase the amount of keepers, and I have been able to shoot down to 1/5th of a second with it

[Paul Hansen]

In regards to getting bounced around, IS isn't going to do that much, but IMHO, it does help in minimizing motion from the small stuff. Every little bit helps. Stabilizing the camera as much as possible when and where you can also helps, but when you are stabilizing it against the car and it's the car that is bouncing around, well, not much you can do there. ;)

After one run session I'll be surprised if I don't end up with 50-100 shots per "pass", as it'd take some rather superhuman power to get what you want exactly when you want it.

I end up shooting out of side windows a lot, as it's the usual case of 90 minute press sessions and borrowing spare cars/personnel to do the job with. And under whatever weather conditions you are in.

http://www.sevenphotos.com/dev/07_nismo_z/07nismo_003.jpg

And, yeah, really, it's how slow of a shutter speed vs. how fast you can drive the car that really determines the situation. Not only does it give the shot more motion, but faster speeds are going to smooth out the "bounce" of the car suspension.

[Jeff Boerio]

Paul,

Care to share the details of your shot? How fast were the cars going? What were the camera settings?

Thanks,

Jeff

[Daniel Buck]

if possible, have things in the background be as close to the car as possible (treeline, fence, buildings, whatever) as they will blur more than things farther off in the distance (unless you are going around a turn or panning the camera)

[Paul Hansen]

The Z photos are archived off onto external backups right now, so it will take a bit of time to track down the exif. But off the top of my head (I have a general idea of what settings I prefer), I'd say I was shooting around F5.6-F8, ISO 100, 1/40th to 1/60th of second speeds. It was dark thanks to the weather, so not difficult to get to those settings. When it comes to rolling shots, too much light is the usual problem, so I don't mind when the weather is not the greatest. I carry around a 2-stop darkening filter that gets used mainly for rolling shots.

When I have limited time with a car (which is most of the time) I start at 1/80th of a sec for the first pass to guarantee a usable shot, then move down to 1/60, 1/40, etc., till I get at least one pass in at 1/15 of a second. If light allows, that is. It needs to be pretty dark out for that (even at ISO50). I tend to look for any sort of shade-filled road as much as possible for this reason.

shot underneath an expressway - not the best background, but had some shade and looked much better than the ones shot in direct sunlight
http://www.sevenphotos.com/dev/07_ecbmw/07_ecbwm_001.jpg

I hate to sound overly diplomatic here, but like any other area of photography, everybody is going to have their preference to achieve the look *they* want. I tend to shoot tight, whereas other people will want more open space and background in the shot.

Oh, something that just came to my mind right now is weight. A nice heavy camera/lens setup is going to be easier to keep stable than a light one during rolling shots. Bolting a weight to a light camera/lens setup may actually help a bit in some cases.

[Jeff Boerio]

Thanks Paul. I just wanted to know the settings to get some ideas of what to expect from "similar" conditions.

Jeff

[Jeff Boerio]

Here's one of the shots I got from my rolling session last weekend. It's not my "best get" -- those shots are embargoed with the team.

http://www.rockinbdigital.com/tmp/naykidracing_1169_600.jpg

1/60 seems to be about the best I'm capable of right now. I tossed all my 1/40 shots. Whether it's the photographer, my choice of chase vehicles, the track, etc is an ongoing scientific experiment. If the track gets resurfaced this winter (as projected), that will erase one variable :D

Jeff