Awesome pic from Paris-Nice cycling race taken by Pascal Pavani. Any idea the settings I would need to recreate that type of effect?
Velonews Gallery from Paris Nice
Velonews Gallery from Paris Nice
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Tell me how to do this with my camera
- Thread starter sanclemente
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's almost certainly Photoshopped. There's a technique called "dragging the shutter" which can produce images in the same vein, but this has all the earmarks of a Photoshop job.
A little explanation as to WHY this would be photoshop.
Well I typed up a huge rambling response looking at this and that, but simply if this were a long exposure there would be a circular blur from the foot/pedel, that the lines coming off the foot are straight back just like everything else on the rider you can quickly assume it was done in photoshop.
There is a lot more to say not long exposure but that is the simplist part to easily point out.
Well I typed up a huge rambling response looking at this and that, but simply if this were a long exposure there would be a circular blur from the foot/pedel, that the lines coming off the foot are straight back just like everything else on the rider you can quickly assume it was done in photoshop.
There is a lot more to say not long exposure but that is the simplist part to easily point out.
The most telltale sign for me is the background. Notice how the left half of the field at the top of the frame is apparently moving at the same rate as the cyclist!
Photoshop.
While it is possible to get a similar effect and it looks like they did (notice the slightly double image of the rider before the blur), it looks "enhanced" ie ruined by photoshop. Not to mention there would be MUCH more blur on that front tire to get the length of trails that is behind the rider. I do like the "dust spots on the image sensor" effect thrown in for "authenticity" though.
To get a similar effect you need to have a long exposure and track your subject until the shutter clicks. If done perfectly (its a tough thing to get right) you will have something similar to what you see above only realistic looking.
For example:
You are shooting a person on a bike, and you have your shutter set at 1/30th of a second or slower. (Use a tripod for sure with a panning head if slower)
You then follow the subject in the view finder, press the shutter and keep moving the camera along with the subject until the shutter closes.
Its easier to do if you have a flash and use second curtain sync.
While it is possible to get a similar effect and it looks like they did (notice the slightly double image of the rider before the blur), it looks "enhanced" ie ruined by photoshop. Not to mention there would be MUCH more blur on that front tire to get the length of trails that is behind the rider. I do like the "dust spots on the image sensor" effect thrown in for "authenticity" though.
To get a similar effect you need to have a long exposure and track your subject until the shutter clicks. If done perfectly (its a tough thing to get right) you will have something similar to what you see above only realistic looking.
For example:
You are shooting a person on a bike, and you have your shutter set at 1/30th of a second or slower. (Use a tripod for sure with a panning head if slower)
You then follow the subject in the view finder, press the shutter and keep moving the camera along with the subject until the shutter closes.
Its easier to do if you have a flash and use second curtain sync.
I'm sure many decent photos have been destroyed in the darkroom, but that has nothing to do with the fact that photoshop ruined this one.
Yep, I'm sure many have. But Photoshop does not, in itself, destroy anything. Bad ideas destroy themselves with the tools available to the image maker. So to attribute Photoshop as destroying an image is similar to blaming a brand of hammer in the house construction. If the idea is unstable, it will crumble regardless of what tools are used.
Now everyone repeat: "Photoshop is not a verb."
Eh, it is in my vocabulary, but not a derogatory one. "Digitally manipulated" is a bit of a mouthful. I didn't get the sense that ronjon10 was roundly denouncing Photoshop use. You have to admit that far too many Photoshop experiments go horribly awry, regardless of the idea(s) behind them. Photoshop jobs can reveal both bad ideas and bad craft. At least I can admit that, and I spend at least some part of every day using that application.