# A few pics from the Ring this weekend, thought I'd share...



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)




----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

Res ~ Fantastic pics.

Can you share some easy tips with me please as I'm off, with my nipper, to watch the Moto GP in Portugal next week.

I've just bought a Canon S3-is and, to be honest, the amount of settings are mind boggling.

Did you use the Sport setting on your camera to take these and do you take several shots at once in order to filter the best ones? Also, is it best to use a tripod and keep the camera still or do you move with the subject?


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

Great pics.

Love the flying Caterham - one occupants helmet is very close to the roll bar.


----------



## raven (May 7, 2002)

Wow those pics are fantastic. I LOVE the orange 911 GT3! 8)


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

A few tips perhaps as I'm no professional by any means.

Remember, every action has a reaction when adjusting settings on a camera.

Things to consider -

Light. If you have good light (not too bright either as too much light can be just as troublesome) there are a few basic settings which can get you good results. for example.

Shutter Speed. The more light the faster the shutter speed can be. Less light the slower the shutter speed will need to be to get the correct exposure. This setting is particularly important for "freezing" the action. When taking a picture of a moving object, it is useful to pan with the subject, therefore you can reduce the shutter speed accordingly. This is particularly useful as you can decrease the aperture size (higher f/stop) which will mean that you get better depth of field. (More of the frame in focus). In poor light conditions, you have to try and get a higher shutter speed for this type of photography. You can do this by -

1. Widening the Aperture (low f/stop) however, this will reduce your depth of field. (Less of the frame in focus). This works to be fair as when you pan with the subject the background will become blurred giving the sense of speed and the subject/foreground will be frozen. Your camera has a range I believe of about f/2.8 - f/3.5 which is wide anyway. f/2.8 lets more light in therefore a higher shutter speed can be gained at the expense of depth of field.

2. You can also raise the ISO setting. The higher the setting the more sensitive the CCD becomes to light. Some people call high ISO films for traditional cameras as "fast films". However, the higher the setting the more "noise" is introduced into the picture. I try not to go over ISO 400 however, my Nikon D80 gets good results at ISO 800 / 1600. A higher ISO means you can raise the shutter speed.

Another tip when taking pictures of moving subjects is to focus on an area of track where you want to take the picture. You can do this in manual focus or in auto mode by pressing the release button half way down. Then when the subject gets to that point you press the release button fully down to take the picture. I believe the camera you have can lock the exposure and focus for this type of shot. (AE/AF lock)

The other option is to use "sport" mode as you suggest. The camera will automatically prioritise the shutter speed and adjust the Exposure, and aperture and perhaps also the ISO automatically. Still pan your shot though as this will help the camera out.

Try the "S" setting also. This will prioritise the shutter speed , therefore enabling you to adjust the shutter speed. The Aperture will be adjusted automatically by the camera.

Also use continuous shooting mode. This means you can pan with the subject with the shutter release button depressed all the way so continuous shots can be taken as you pan. You then run the chance of getting the shot you want from a number of shots taken.

Your camera I believe has IS. (Image stabilisation) Not sure how it works on your camera but it usually helps when taking stills, not really for action shots. I find a tripod in this instance is too cumbersome and doesn't really help, it just restrict your movement with the camera therefore potentially missing shot. I never used a tripod on any of my shots.

Hope this helps....

In the meantime a few more pics from the weekend.


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

raven said:


> Wow those pics are fantastic. I LOVE the orange 911 GT3! 8)


I know, gorgeous looking car. That why I bought one whilst I was there.


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

Wow. Thanks for that mate. Very useful and helpful.

Can I ask though why the background isn't blurred if you were panning with the subject? Is this because of a faster shutter speed?

Finally, (possibly), I know that the shutter speed adjusts how much light is let into the camera but what does the aperture adjust/compensate for?


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

Most of the shots are taken with the subject coming towards me, therefore there is limited panning done, hence the reason for limited blur. I had the aperture wide open to get as faster shutter speed as I could. As my shutter speed could not be set any faster, it was pointless panning at 90 deg. to me as the subject would have been blurred. (as the photo below shows, not a great example but you'll see what I mean if you look at the graffiti on the road)

This picture isn't very good, however, as the subject is nearly 90 deg. to me you can see the effect on the background, so you get the feeling of motion where as in the pics I posted previously the only way you know they are moving are the wheels look as though they are spinning. If the shutter speed would have been any faster then -

1. The wheels would have been static and
2. the background would be static also and
3. the images would have been too dark and under exposed. I would have had to lift the ISO too high to compensate making the images very grainy/noisy. (Zoom into the pictures, you'll see what I mean.

So no feeling of speed/movement would have been present. Almost as though the cars/bikes had stopped.


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

Thanks again.

So, what's the difference between the ISO and the apperture then? They both sound like they adjust the amount of light let in to the camera! :?

I'll be gutted if I come back and find hundreds of cr4p pics after such an event.


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

TT2BMW said:


> Thanks again.
> 
> So, what's the difference between the ISO and the apperture then? They both sound like they adjust the amount of light let in to the camera! :?
> 
> I'll be gutted if I come back and find hundreds of cr4p pics after such an event.


ISO sensitivity is the digital equivalent of film speed. The higher the ISO sensitivity, the less light needed to make an exposure, allowing higher shutter speeds or smaller apertures. (higher ISO means more noise in your pictures) I adjust ISO as a last resort. Trying to keep ISO as low as 50 / 100 or even 200.

Aperture acts in a similar way, except you don't get any picture degradation. Aperture refers to the size of the opening in the lens that determines the amount of light falling onto the film or sensor. The size of the opening is controlled by an adjustable diaphragm of overlapping blades similar to the pupils of our eyes. Aperture affects exposure and depth of field.

Hope that makes sense. 

Practice on some moving cars to get a feel for panning and the correct settings.


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

TT2BMW said:


> Thanks again.
> 
> So, what's the difference between the ISO and the apperture then? They both sound like they adjust the amount of light let in to the camera! :?
> 
> I'll be gutted if I come back and find hundreds of cr4p pics after such an event.


ISO sensitivity is the digital equivalent of film speed. The higher the ISO sensitivity, the less light needed to make an exposure, allowing higher shutter speeds or smaller apertures. (higher ISO means more noise in your pictures) I adjust ISO as a last resort. Trying to keep ISO as low as 50 / 100 or even 200.

Aperture acts in a similar way, except you don't get any picture degradation. Aperture refers to the size of the opening in the lens that determines the amount of light falling onto the film or sensor. The size of the opening is controlled by an adjustable diaphragm of overlapping blades similar to the pupils of our eyes. Aperture affects exposure and depth of field.

Hope that makes sense.  For every one good picture you throw five away...even the pro's use this method.


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

awesome pictures, thx


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

Liked your camara-lesson also :wink:

Myself i prefer to take pictures with more "speed" in.
Don't get me wrong, your pic's look excellent.

But i like to move with the camara with the same speed as the car goes by and than use a slower shuttle speed.
It's very difficult indeed, and it needs a lot of practize.

But it's nice to hear and see that you had a nice day at the Nurburgring :wink:


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

ResB ~ Thanks very much for taking the time to explain in such detail. Very useful and much appreciated. It's made a lot more sense now.

Hopefully, in about 10 days, I'll be able to show some half decent pics of the Moto GP in Estoril. Fingers crossed eh!! :wink:


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

I've been practising and am pretty pleased with the results so far:


















Meet Huggy and Kylie!


----------



## Rebel (Feb 12, 2005)

hmmm, the left one looks familiar to a MK2 member on this forum...


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

Great pics Res. And some classy machinery.

I don't do 'personal' plates - (after all every number plate is unique and who really cares what your initials are?)

BUT RS07 UFO on the orange GT3RS worked well.


----------



## drjam (Apr 7, 2006)

[smiley=thumbsup.gif] 
Great pics, and a great selection of cars [though there's one mean-looking orange one which I confess I have no idea what it is.]



ResB said:


> ...higher ISO means more noise in your pictures) I adjust ISO as a last resort. Trying to keep ISO as low as 50 / 100 or even 200.
> 
> For every one good picture you throw five away...even the pro's use this method.


a bit off-topic & one for those who don't mind fiddling around with their PC, but I can highly recommend a bit of software under the bizarre name of "noise ninja", which - as the name suggests - removes noise from digital pics. Great for letting you use a higher ISO where you need to - e.g. to avoid camera shake (or freeze action like here) by upping the shutter speed. It's about $30 or so to download.

And of course the last comment about pros is the key one - memory is cheap, so click away!


----------



## redTT (Nov 16, 2006)

Fantastic pics and some great advice too.

Another tip: if you are going to use continuous shooting, make sure you have a high capacity and high speed memory card. This will ensure that the recording to the card process keeps pace with the picture taking, otherwise you may not be able to take as many pics as you hope.

I have a SanDisk Extreme III 2GB for my Nikon D40x ... Â£15.99 delivered from play.com !!

P.S. What lens did you use ?


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

redTT said:


> Fantastic pics and some great advice too.
> 
> Another tip: if you are going to use continuous shooting, make sure you have a high capacity and high speed memory card. This will ensure that the recording to the card process keeps pace with the picture taking, otherwise you may not be able to take as many pics as you hope.
> 
> ...


Good tip. I shoot RAW so a fast memory card is required you're right. I happen to use the 2GB Extreme III's also.

I used the very respectfully priced Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR lens. Not sure about it yet, in terms of finding it's sweet spot but for the money and it's 300mm reach, I don't think you can go wrong.


----------



## HighTT (Feb 14, 2004)

And the previous weekend     

http://images.mw-sportfoto.de/2007/tour ... i1215.html


----------



## 55JWB (May 7, 2002)

ResB

As already said, some really great pics... where were you taking them from, what corner?

I am off there tomorrow for 3 days  shame you cant come as the official tour photographer :wink:

Jason


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

55JWB said:


> ResB
> 
> As already said, some really great pics... where were you taking them from, what corner?
> 
> ...


Thanks Jason, tough decision that, Race round the Ring, take pictures of people racing round the Ring......emmm toughy. . Either way I wish I was there again as I can't wait to get back. 

All the photos except No.2 were taken on the Pflanzgarten










and No.2 was on Adenau Bridge.


----------



## redTT (Nov 16, 2006)

ResB said:


> redTT said:
> 
> 
> > Fantastic pics and some great advice too.
> ...


Ooo good choice of lens. I've just bought the 55-200 version of the same Nikon VR lens and can't wait to try it


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

redTT said:


> ResB said:
> 
> 
> > redTT said:
> ...


Great lens.  Wish I had that one.


----------



## raven (May 7, 2002)

ResB said:


> I used the very respectfully priced Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR lens. Not sure about it yet, in terms of finding it's sweet spot but for the money and it's 300mm reach, I don't think you can go wrong.


I just looked this lense up and it's around Â£95 - seems very reasonable - I was expecting it to be more like Â£300 ish?


----------



## redTT (Nov 16, 2006)

raven said:


> ResB said:
> 
> 
> > I used the very respectfully priced Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR lens. Not sure about it yet, in terms of finding it's sweet spot but for the money and it's 300mm reach, I don't think you can go wrong.
> ...


Is it the AF-S VR lens ? The non-VR (vibration reduction lens) is nearer that price but the VR lenses are much more expensive c. Â£350

If you have found it for Â£95 please let me know so i can buy one !!!


----------



## raven (May 7, 2002)

redTT said:


> raven said:
> 
> 
> > ResB said:
> ...


Sorry, you're right, it's the non VR one. I guess you'd need the VR one wouldn't you? Thought it was too good to be true!


----------

