Warp wrote:

>  You seem to have the same misconception about motion blur as most
>  other 
>people have as well. The misconception is that the motion blur leaves a
>trace behind the object, but the object itself is more or less sharp.
>  I think that this is a consequence of artistic effects used in
>  cartoons 
>(they draw lines in the path the obect has travelled to indicate that
>the object is moving very fast). Although this artistic effect works
>for cartoons, it has nothing to do with reality.
>

Two small notes,
In addition to the cartoon example, a lot of photos are a combination of a 
motion blurred object and a "static" one. In many cases a flash light is 
used in combination with a long slow shutter speed. It gives the sharp 
object with a blurred trail.

Something that sometimes can be seen is a deformation of the moving 
object. It's a result of the kind of shutter used in the camera. It can be 
a slit moving from left to right or top down. A top down moving slit can 
result in a car with oval wheels.

Ingo

-- 
Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
Pov-Ray    : http://members.home.nl/seed7/

Post a reply to this message