>
> > pictures resized to 600x401 but not cropped or otherwise modified.
> >
> > http://www.xdstech.com/istd/tim/taxi1.jpg (50 kb)
> > http://www.xdstech.com/istd/tim/taxi2.jpg (40 kb)
> > http://www.xdstech.com/istd/tim/taxi3.jpg (48 kb)
> > http://www.xdstech.com/istd/tim/other1.jpg (68 kb)
> >
> > let me know what you think, but keep in mind that tracking a car moving at
> > 30 mph from 25 feet away for a 1/4 of a second is not hard.
>
> (A good trick in a situation like this is to use flash - second-curtain
> sync would be my choice - to freeze the car at the end of the exposure.
> That will give you sharp detail without needing to get the pan spot-on).
Another thing to be aware of is that if the angle of the car changes much
(which it will in anything except a full side shot) it won't be possible
to get everything totally sharp; the front and/or back of the car will be
somewhat blurred even if the middle of the car is sharp.
You can see what I mean in this shot:
<http://www.panix.com/~johnf/temp/panshot.jpg>
That's taken at a focal length of around 100mm (on a D100) using a shutter
speed of 1/60. It's taken at the slowest part of the track (it's at Druids
at Brands Hatch during last year's Champ Car weekend), so the cars are only
going perhaps 60mph or less; closer to taxi speeds than racecar speeds.
The decals on the side of the car (and the details on the driver's helmet)
are sharp, but the number on the rear wing, and the lettering on the front
wing, show signs of blur.
On this shot (with a faster shutter speed of 1/160) details are sharp:
<http://www.panix.com/~johnf/temp/RentaRide.jpg>
That's partly because of the higher shutter speed, and partly because
the car is completely side-on, so there's less change of distance.
(Ignore the Hertz logos, which *are* blurred; they're a later add-on)
