I love the feeling of mmmmovement within the second exposures in this series of wrestlers. I'm guessing each is a double exposure with slow shutter speeds. I'd like to recreate the feeling of movement in a nude shoot this weekend. Any suggestions, tutorials or samples with explanations on how to achieve this effect would be greatly appreciated.
Kaouthia
Posts: 3,080
Lancaster, England, United Kingdom
Each of them looks to be one exposure, a mixture of long exposure and stroboscopic flash/repeat flash (probably manual pops of the flash during the exposure).
Probably speedlights to be able to get quick recycle times and lower power so as not to completely blow out the ambient with several pops going off.
Toto Photo
Posts: 1,112
San Francisco, California, US
I was thinking hot lights rather than strobes. The first position of the wrestlers in each shot is one that is typically static for several seconds in a match, then there is the movement (swirly bit) usually quick, then wrestlers usually become static again which could be the end of the exposure and the relative nonactivity (once again) of the wrestlers.
The reason I wasn't thinking strobes is because the swirly bits are so bright with highlights in almost every one and wrestlers are swirling for MUCH longer a period of time than any strobe could still be firing, no?
its been a while since i played with the front shutter sync and rear shutter sync settings on my camera, but as I recall the results looked pretty similar as far as the wrestling pics go, slow shutter speed and play with your flash sync and exposure compensation options till you get the desired effect.. good luck
That's pretty stupid easy to do once you nail down the exposure and flash settings.
Where you see crisp lines is a flash, where they are blurred is hotlights. No real trick to it other than try a few things and see how they work. Well, and this works best on a darker background, white or bright colors tend to blow over anything as they expose - obviously.
I wouldn't use rear shutter, and for these I'd either handhold or front curtain - not sure how long the exposures are.
awfullypretty wrote: I agree with Rear Shutter and long exposure... the way you would shoot at a club to catch the lights.
Ahhh, Rear Shutter!
So, an exposure is just the addition of all the light exposing the sensor/film. It doesn't care really if it lasts 10 seconds, 4, or 1/whatever. So popping rear or front have more to do with when the flash fires than dragging the shutter for proper exposure.
For clubs I like using Front, yes, Front. Because I know where my subjects are, I know where they are going to be when I take a shot, and I know how my flash is going to freeze them. This is even more critical when dragging the shutter - I have no idea where anyone is going to be and how they are posing in a few seconds, so why let the flash wait?
Rear would work great when there is a need to freeze the action at the end of an exposure and when there is a decent idea of where the exposure ends and how things are going to be posed as well as how the movement works. This is not the case in the images above, and freehand would be different than rear.
Toto Photo wrote: I was thinking hot lights rather than strobes. The first position of the wrestlers in each shot is one that is typically static for several seconds in a match, then there is the movement (swirly bit) usually quick, then wrestlers usually become static again which could be the end of the exposure and the relative nonactivity (once again) of the wrestlers.
The reason I wasn't thinking strobes is because the swirly bits are so bright with highlights in almost every one and wrestlers are swirling for MUCH longer a period of time than any strobe could still be firing, no?
What makes you think strobe?
It looks like strobe when you see frozen shots in the middle of a movement. The thing I see here is the ratio of any flash exposure to ambient exposure. The flash exposure is very slight. It'll add that bit of focus and detail that strictly ambient exposures won't unless your subject freezes in on position. Such as the guy lying on the mat, etc.
Stuff like this is mostly experimentation..so think mainly long ambient exposures with a VERY small hint of flash. You can add diffusion to the flash if it's too powerful.
Didn't notice the crash zooming, thanks! I'll have to go back and look for that.
Now that I look again... maybe not. I thought that some of the double images looked slightly larger than the strobe capture, but maybe it's just the difference of being in position and then standing in attack.
I love the feeling of mmmmovement within the second exposures in this series of wrestlers. I'm guessing each is a double exposure with slow shutter speeds. I'd like to recreate the feeling of movement in a nude shoot this weekend. Any suggestions, tutorials or samples with explanations on how to achieve this effect would be greatly appreciated.
Slow shutter speed with flash. In school we called it balanced lighting. Similar to what wedding shooters call dragging the shutter. Basically the flash is freezing the people but the natural ambient light is causing motion trails because of the slow shutter speed.
Toto Photo
Posts: 1,112
San Francisco, California, US
Good Egg Productions wrote:
Now that I look again... maybe not. I thought that some of the double images looked slightly larger than the strobe capture, but maybe it's just the difference of being in position and then standing in attack.
I think I'm going to retract my opinion.
I'd have to agree with you. I went back and although the fourth picture looked like the scale of his leg changed, I think that was because of the shutter drag and not a zoom. Thanks though, gave me another reason to look at them again.
Toto Photo
Posts: 1,112
San Francisco, California, US
Andrew Thomas Evans wrote:
Ahhh, Rear Shutter!
So, an exposure is just the addition of all the light exposing the sensor/film. It doesn't care really if it lasts 10 seconds, 4, or 1/whatever. So popping rear or front have more to do with when the flash fires than dragging the shutter for proper exposure.
For clubs I like using Front, yes, Front. Because I know where my subjects are, I know where they are going to be when I take a shot, and I know how my flash is going to freeze them. This is even more critical when dragging the shutter - I have no idea where anyone is going to be and how they are posing in a few seconds, so why let the flash wait?
Rear would work great when there is a need to freeze the action at the end of an exposure and when there is a decent idea of where the exposure ends and how things are going to be posed as well as how the movement works. This is not the case in the images above, and freehand would be different than rear.
Kaouthia wrote: Each of them looks to be one exposure, a mixture of long exposure and stroboscopic flash/repeat flash (probably manual pops of the flash during the exposure).
Probably speedlights to be able to get quick recycle times and lower power so as not to completely blow out the ambient with several pops going off.
Toto Photo
Posts: 1,112
San Francisco, California, US
-Ira wrote:
Why don't you think it's stroboscopic flash?
I'm being convinced that a flash may have been used but I don't see any evidence it was fired more than twice and it must have been well balanced with ambient or the swirls would be darker.
My current thought, by sifting through these posts is that this is a double (not multiple) exposure on tripod, dragging the shutter on both exposures, but the drag (swirls) only show up on the second exposure (swirls) because of the static "pose" of the wrestlers during the first exposure.
Toto Photo
Posts: 1,112
San Francisco, California, US
fullmetalphotographer wrote: Slow shutter speed with flash. In school we called it balanced lighting. Similar to what wedding shooters call dragging the shutter. Basically the flash is freezing the people but the natural ambient light is causing motion trails because of the slow shutter speed
The more I look at these, I think it's a combination of both.
There are definitely distinct multiple exposures. There are also trails which would be a result of ambient light dragging.
| 
| 
| edu