Tappan From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1541 posts, RR: 39 Posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2119 times:
I uploaded two Boston sunset photos which had most of the picture blurry except for the A-330 and RJ...This is called panning. Have some of you tried it? I used a 600mm lens on a tripod with a shutter speed of 1/8 of a second. I "followed" the jet in the air by moving the lens on the tripod. I thought it looked pretty cool, but sad to say it was rejected due to being blurry.
PUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4164 posts, RR: 53
Reply 2, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1957 times:
Could you show the picture here? It should be reachable under the path:
Would be great to see the shot from you )
My only attempt this far is this one which was made with a shutter speed of 1/5 of a second if I remember correctly and was also rejected.
Kellmark From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 697 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1886 times:
I have had the same experience. An evening pan shot of an Alitalia 747 taken on takeoff with the blur. I thought it was probably the best shot of an airliner that I have ever taken. It was rejected. Too "blurred" (I read "arty"). Well, its not my site. But artistic shots can have a problem getting on here.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 810 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1872 times:
I've managed to get a few successful panned shots, lots of failures - and a significant number of borderlines. When panning an aircraft at very slow shutter speeds, you MAY be able to compensate for horizontal motion, but there is also a small amount of vertical motion - either photographer enduced, or due to the aircraft (bumpy runways!). The net result is that getting a good motion blur and a perfectly sharp aircraft is very difficult. More likely, the aircraft is a little less than "crisp" - whether this gets accepted or ditched as blurry is a bit of a lottery.
Screener4 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1807 times:
I had a look at both of your panning shots, Mark, and both were rejected by Johan himself. This just goes to show, for those people who think that it matters WHO you are when your photos are being screened, that even the great and the good get photos rejected.
[pointed comment so Sukhoi: it also goes to show that you shouldn't simply lay rejection criticisms at the door of the screeners! (makes a note of "Paul Dopson" in the Screeners' Big Rejection Book )]
Tappan From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1541 posts, RR: 39
Reply 19, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1772 times:
Did not mean for this thread to say "Told ya so"...Looking at it again, I think the picture could be sharper. I will try a re scan and if still soft will try to shoot it again. I know its know Kai Tak, but here in BOS a panned photo only has a few city lights
Keep up the great site!