Garbage. The "generic" photo is the blurred, lack-of-detail car, typical of the kind of shot that is produced by people who don't know how to do better. If you want to blur the car, then blur it. But if you're trying to get it sharp (which is the purpose of trying to pan with it), then get it sharp.
Of course using flash changes the mood and feel of the photograph. That's the whole point. But as you don't use flash, you don't have a lot of experience to go on here. I do, which is why I made the specific suggestions that I did. > Sure, John, that'll work, but it will yield a very generic photo. The idea of > showing motion throughout the image, blurred subjects, is another approach, as is > the "practice, practice, practice" approach. Different strokes for different > folks ... Arnie gets kudos for trying something that's a little different for > him. And damn it, flash changes the mood and the feel of the photograph. > > John Francis wrote: > > > > > > > i specifically didnt want to use a flash - that was the whole point. it does > > > take a little practice, maybe next time i'll be more successful. > > > > If you use the same slow shutter speed (1/4), and trailing-curtain-sync flash > > (with -1 stop of flash exposure compensation) you'll still get all the trails > > of lights, etc., you see in your original photograph, but the detail on the > > car will look much better. Try it, if you've got a flash that will do that. >
