Forgive me for being dense, but it seems to me that you cannot tell whether he is using trailing curtain or not, because he's panning at the time hew's releasing the shutter. I will explain why I think this, then you can educate me as to how I'm wrong.
The relative motion that's important in establishing the direction of the blur is that of the car in the viewfinder (or, more precisely, on the film) during the period the shutter is open. If the lens is panning forward faster than the car is moving, such that the car appears to be moving backwards in the viewfinder (or on the film) at the time of the exposure, trailing curtain sync will look like leading curtain sync. The only way to tell for sure is to have the lens stationary and the object moving, or to know somehow that the car was actually moving forward at a greater rate than the lens was tracking it. If the lens is stationary, such that the car is certain to be moving from right to left in the viewfinder at the time the shot is fired, then the blur will reliably indicate whether leading or trailing curtain sync was used. OK, where have I misapprehended the physics of all this? Quoting Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I > On Jan 2, 2004, at 4:44 PM, Christian wrote: > > > > I've no idea what he was doing! I was thinking that he was panning > > using > > flash and getting the blur-going-forward effect which should be solved > > using > > trailing-curtain-sync. > > > > That's exactly what he was doing. You shoot at 1/15 or so with a flash > that's close in exposure to ambient and you get some nice motion blur. > But without trailing curtain sync they go the wrong way. i've done > these kind of shots for magazines from time to time using my archaic > equipment. The solution? You just have the driver back up. Of course > that won't work when shooting race cars. If it does, they're probably > in trouble and you might as well wait for the impending crash <g?. > ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/