How You Shoot...

[Kevin DiOssi]

I've noticed a lot of emphasis being placed on camera frame rate, especially when it refers to panning. It has me a bit puzzled because I feel like I may be in the minority on how I use my camera. I have a 40D and a 50D. Both cameras are about 6fps or more and I rarely use this incredible feature unless I'm shooting car-to-car because you never know what bumps are in the road or crap will show up in the background.

When I'm shooting motorsports I find 6.5fps overkill and annoying. I've used it to nail the "middle shot" since I'll take 3-5 of a car set as they go by and keep maybe 1 or 2. To be honest, my technique often involved taking ONE photo as a car goes by. I set my shot up so that the shutter speed and focus is at a single position and I will attempt to take the shot at a particular point as the car(s) drives past. As a result, I can have 5 or 6 cars go by and have the same "keeper" at the exact position on the track. My friend actually said "that's kind of creepy" and it sort of is, I guess.

From what it sounds like, many shooters on this site and others just see the car and start shooting away praying that 1 or 2 of the 10-15 photos they took were keepers. This is where, I feel, equipment has helped mediocre photographers get an advantage. Not claiming to be great, BTW. Hell, I would be without a job if it weren't for the incredible IS systems on my Canon lenses. haha

So I would like to instigate a discussion about how you use your camera's shutter speed capabilities with your panning.

[John Thawley]

Nope. You've got it wrong.

For the most part, no one here is "seeing the car, starting to shoot and praying."

First off... let's qualify that. WE ARE ALL PRAYING. There is a lot happening in a pan... and we're shooting way below the recommended shutter speeds offered to reduce tremble and we're shooting with long glass. So.... the tiniest bump in your pan and the image is soft.

Also... don't you think the subject vehicle is affected in the same way your camera was in the pursuit vehicle? Does the subject not bounce on the track as you pan?

Lastly, the burst of a few frames in a pan offers up several accommodations for variables in the shot. Car bounce as mentioned, lag in your pan motion, angle of the car's approach affecting the "sweet spot" of the area in focus... and the variance in the ambient light affecting the "scene" as you pan across it.

Lastly, the quicker your burst rate is, the more chance you'll have to SUCCESSFULLY capture the shot you wanted. For instance, let's say there's an opening in the background between and ugly camper and a bright blue porta-potty. And, at 6 frames per second, IF YOU"RE SPOT ON, you can squeeze of two shots in that space... whereas at 10 frames per second, you can squeeze of three. You've increased your cnance of getting the CLEAN shot that you needed FOR YOUR CLIENT. Hence, you can move on and cover more locations.

Look... part of this is art and part of it is production. With your subject blasting by you or coming toward you at 160+ mph, it's covering a lot of ground. This changes the composition of your shot rather quickly. So, if the car covers 20ft per frame or 10 ft per frame is going to make a huge difference in the actual composition you were going for.

Just as an example, take the ferris wheel shot at the Rolex 24.... you've only got a frame, frame and half to get the car RIGHT where you want it. So, a faster frame rate might get you two useable frames.

Same if you want the car coming through the apex.

I want to be able to pick the sharpest image of the set... but what good is it if the composition is wrong?

Use the tool to improve the product. Everyone drools at the shot you show them. NO ONE is interested in the ones you threw away. Nor does the client pay you more because you got it in "one shot." Get over it.

JT

[Cyril Ma]

I like watching a 10fps clip in cr2 format

[Todd Corzett]

I find 8.5fps enough, but if you could make my camera 10fps or 20fps I'd take it. Would I just press the shutter down for a few seconds and take a dozen images? HELL NO! But, when I press the shutter for a fraction of a second to fire off two or three shots at the 'sweet spot' of the pan I will have more several shots to choose from (rather than just one).

I typically shoot in two shot bursts. Yes, this means that my keeper rate is lower... but I don't care about how many photos I throw away, rather how many keepers I can get out of a given composition/shutter speed. There are other times where I'll come out with two great photos or two pieces of total crap. But there are many times I find that one shot is slightly sharper or better composed than the other, and I'd much rather have the better of the two shots than only one of them (because I only took one photo).

I found that when I was shooting at 3fps back with my D30 that I would take on average 3-5 laps longer at a given corner than the other photographers shooting with 1-series (hi-fps) cameras. When I got my 1D MkII I realized that it was because they were able to get more shots in a shorter period of time (due to the fps) and could move on quicker because of it. I love that I know that I can get my 'safety shots' in two laps, rather than 5, because of the fps.

So with panning (as anything else) do you really need 8.5 or 10fps? No, but it sure can make your job easier/faster when you get more than one shot per lap. And I think those (few) photographers who 'spray and prey' will still get crummy photos, regardless of camera fps.

-Todd...

PS - I turn IS off for panning, I find it just gets in the way... but that being said, the AF in the modern DSLRs is my saving grace (as I have an astigmatism and don't shoot with glasses, so everything is blurry until I get back to the computer to edit).

[Mike Ditz]

Pixels are free.
If I can get the shot I need at bursts 10 fps (not motosports) and I want to spray and pray I'll do it. In the work I do I am looking at the background the sharpness the light on the car, etc. each frame is different and the more I have to choose from the happier I am.
When I do panning there are times that all are sharp and sometimes none are sharp, and that is under controlled conditions. I can't imagine shooting one frame and having it be "the one". I come from the cover my butt school. If you can do it ONE shot, good for you, but I'd rather give myself some options...
You don't get any awards for not getting the shot because you shot at a low frame rate because of some idea that only hacks use high FPS. Why not use the tools that are available to you? FWIW AF has made more people better photographers (or sharper photographers) than higher frame rates.

Each advance in technology makes this easier. Were photos better before motor drives? or light meters or color film or AF. I don't know but there were fewer of them, fewer photographers too. Can you explain why you find 6 fps annoying? Wading through a bunch of 10fps bursts can be annoying but less annoying than missing the shot because I shot one frame...:o

[John Thawley]

Wasn't it Wayne Gretsky who said, "I never made a shot I didn't take."

[Sevan Pulurian]

I personally shoot High burst. 10+ on the !D3 and 5-6 on my 30D. It is just easier for me personally to do it that way. But I have gotten some really sweet sharp images from a single frame shot. The high burst frame shooting does help but it also can be accomplished easily with a single or low bust frame rate. But I think it all falls back to the shooters knowledge and experience more then anything else. It is possible to shoot 10-15 fps and still get crappy shots. This is my two cents.

[Daniel Buck]

Wasn't it Wayne Gretsky who said, "I never made a shot I didn't take."
and so much easier to do with digital! :)

[John Thawley]

Once again, though.... quit focusing on the SECOND. It's not about how many frames in one second. It's how quickly you can grab a burst of two or three.

[David Adolphus]

Once again, though.... quit focusing on the SECOND. It's not about how many frames in one second. It's how quickly you can grab a burst of two or three.

I see a Red Scarlet in your future. What's the max framerate? 350FPS? Jeez, even their $3,500 complete kit camera does 150fps at 25mp.

I seldom shoot on tracks, so my experience is different, but I can certainly relate. I find I start out taking a big burst, then gradually adjust pass-by-pass until I figure out the real sweet spot, and concentrate heavily on that--I know after five or six passes when the angle of the car and light are where I want, and I've adjusted my position, so I can wait until I know everything's about to be in alignment and get my pans. I do a lot of moving around in that process, and sometimes it's a dozen passes--laps for you--until I like what I'm getting.

Car-to-car has a higher percentage of good angles, but a much higher percentage of unusable shots due to bumps and other sources of unintended blur.