A day at the V8 Supercars & Darn happy with results

[tasadam]

Bearing MattK's tutorial exercisein mind, I went to Symmons Plains armed with my D70 and the 2 kit lenses, tripod, two 1Gb cards, a portable hard disk card copier, and the all important - a borrowed 80-200 F2.8 lens.

I had FUN!

Firstly, I apologize for the crappy thumbnail production here - I really wanted to get them small as I am on dialup and I know how it feels if anyone out there is on as slow and crappy a connection as I am.

Secondly, the photos these links go to are on average 300 k each. I experimented for ages to try and find a balance between quality and size, I found that if I made them any smaller than this, the quality downgrades to the point that I feel doesn't do the photos any justice.

Third, there has been no alteration to the photos except a bit of cropping to tidy them up. No fancy photoshopping or anything. Oh, I did crop out half the car on the last photo, that was the biggest alteration.

Lastly, it's just a pity I cannot post these in the original size, for on my nice new 17 inch monitor, these look so darn good!!

All 200 mm focal length unless stated


1/180 @ f13


1/125 @ f13


1/60 @ f22 (yes, 1/60th!!)


185mm 1/125 @ f16 Main straight, over 250km/hr!
I do love the pretty cars, makes the photos look nicer


1/3000 @ f2.8
Too fast a shutter - apart from the flame, it could be parked there. I much prefer the moving photos.


1/180 @ f13


1/90 @ f22


1/180 @ f16


1/180 @ f16


1/90 @ f19


170mm 1/125 @ f16 Again, well over 250 km/hr I love the sharpness in the logo here, a great advertising shot.


185mm 1/90 @ f16 also on main straight. Darn lucky capture - I love the "speed look". And the driver? Paul WEEL!

So this is the first time I got to use the big lens, and my first attempt at high speed capture of cars like this.
One of the greatest things I like about these photos is that I did not have access to areas of the track that the press photographers did. Makes the results more rewarding.

What do you think?

[Raskill]

Nice mate, and thanks for posting so many! Your panning technique must be spot on to get the illusion of speed so well. 1/90 and 1/60 is pretty slow, but you still managed to capture sharp images. Well done!



Don't worry about having dial up, I'm sure broadband will reach tassie one day. I didn't even know you had telephone lines down there yet...

Great pics mate.

[maca]

nice work at the slow speeds very tough to get it sharp
well done

[barry]

tasadam

Some good shots. Looks like you need to buy your own 80-200 lens.

barry

[barry]

Did anyone else go to this event

[tasadam]

Don't worry about having dial up, I'm sure broadband will reach tassie one day. I didn't even know you had telephone lines down there yet...

Internet speed is a real sore point with me.

Did anyone else go to this event

Or do I have exclusivity?

The answer is a definite YES - there were over 30,000 people there

Seriously, though, there was this guy

Does anyone know what this lens would be?

And this guy

I wonder how fit he would have to be, to carry all that kit around all day...

And this guy

OK So that doesn't quite qualify as a DSLR...

And this guy with the best view and the most expensive camera...

[blinkblink]

Fantastic photos. That one at 1/60' is as clear as bell.
Well done and thanks for posting.

[tasadam]

Fantastic photos. That one at 1/60' is as clear as bell.
Well done and thanks for posting.

OK So I'll let you all into a little tip I did to get that shot (and the other side shots...)
I set the tripod up and got it adjusted so that when I pan up the track, the gridline stays at exactly the same vertical level as the area of track I was shooting.
That involved minor adjustments to the legs of the tripod as well as a slight adjustment to the 0/90 degree swivel plate at the tripod head.

Once I had the camera "tracking" perfectly (an appropriate phrase), all I had to do was pan the photos at the same speed as the cars.

That obviously took a lot of frames, and a lot of experiment with various settings. Generally, I left it in Aperture priority and tweaked the wheel a fair bit.

With this method, there was a bit of a risk of convergance (I hope that's the right expression to describe what I mean) - the centre of the car clear, but the front and back blurry. With 200mm zoom I was far enough away not to have to worry about all that.

The photos on the main straight get this a bit - in shot 11 the BOC is clear but the front of the car is blurry, and if you study Lufkin on the tailfin you will notice it starting to go as well. At f16 it's not a depth of field problem, just a problem with a fast moving object.

Consider this - in shot 11 the car has travelled a good 300 mm with the shutter open. If I were to have taken one shot at the start of that 300mm and used say 1/8000 sec shutter speed, then another shot at the end of that 300mm again at 1/8000, then merged the 2 photos together, they would produce a blurry effect at the front and back of the photo as the car is at a slightly different angle between these 2 photos. So when it is all done with one exposure as in this photo, that's the result you get.

Not a fault with the image, more a desired effect. Fantastic to emphasise motion of a majority of the subject is clear. I would love to try this on racehorses and find out what speeds make great action images - catch the rider tracking straight, the legs a blur, the horse head up & down... Could be fun!

With these shots though, the real skill would come in when you are trying to get a particular part of the car clear, say a logo on the front fender, you would need to work out whether it would be better to wait for the car to be directly beside you. And it takes lots of attempts with cars at those speeds.

The 50 logo in the last shot is a better example of what I'm talking about here. It's directly beside me, and clear. The front of the car is blurry. My explanation above is why. In that image you can see below the front wheel in the grass, a bright yellow "something" maybe a flower bud or whatever, appearing as a long yellow line. From this you can see how far the car travelled while the shutter was open.

If you wanted to get really technical, you could assess the speed of the car by this, except that the yellow object in the grass is quite a distance forward of the car.
How? Assuming the yellow flower was the same distance away as the car. And that the flower "trail" is exactly 19 inches long - the same length as the width of the wheel. That's 47.5 cm in 1/90 of a second (exposure time)
So 47.5 x 90 = 42.75 metres in one second. Multiplied by 3600 (how many seconds in an hour) and you have 153.9 km/hr.
Except that the flower is closer to the camera in this case, so it is not nearly an accurate guide. A railing on the very side of the track would work better.

I must say, overall I was most disappointed with most of the shots taken at F2.8, it produced a result similar to what I might expect from the 70-300 G kit lens, sort of a glazed effect. Perhaps due to the very high shutter speeds? It would have been fun to experiment with a neutral density filter so I could use wide apertures and slow shutters. Alas, no ND filter in this kit.

Some of you probably know all of this. Maybe some don't agree with everything I've said, that's fine too. It's just me looking deep into the theory of why a photo has come out like it has, and coming up with an explanation that theoretically fits.

[Raskill]

Thanks for the explanation. I reckon your slower shutter speeds are some of the best shots I've seen of motor sports in a while, gives a very good impression of speed to say the least.

I don't have any races to attend for a while, a bit disappointing seeing I'll soon have a 70-200 VR to play with

[Jonesy]

Not only some great images but some great info as well!

Thanks and bring on the Clipsal 500 in Adelaide...

[drifter]

Tasadam . Awsome shots there .They are excellent . Particulary the ones with the blurred crowd as the background .Really conveys the sense of speed . One of the biggest annoyances i have with shooting cars is getting decent backgrounds . Boring old dunnies , grass ,gravel ,empty space make for dull backdrops .Not that they're the feature but you know what i mean . Well done

[Matt. K]

Tasadam
I'm impressed! Now use the same technique on horses at the trots, dancers, football and soccer etc.
By working your way through the exercise you learn more in a day than most learn in a year. Well done.