Panning on the easel

[brucemuir]

I guess I'll eventually just try it myself but has anyone successfully done a pan when printing.

I have a shot where I'd like to impart some motion but the shutter speed I used froze the subject.

What if I panned the paper at the last say 15-25% of the exposure time in hopes of getting something somewhat sharp but with some movement also?

 

[Rick A]

The results will depend on the exposure time, how long do you normally expose for? Try it and show us the results.

 

[brucemuir]

You know the more I've been thinking it may not work the way I am envisioning but it's worth a try.

I'm thinking the subject will end up being as blurred as the background. When you pan in camera you follow the subject and mostly just the background blurs.

As far as exposures they can be all over the place depending on neg density and aperture on the enlarger.

My enlarger head also has a low/high setting on the head. It's a Chromega Dichroic II.

 

[Ian Grant]

The unsharpness and grain will probably look poor.

Print as is & pan when re-photographing with a faster grainier film use an ND filter if needed. The edge effects and grain are important in an image.

Ian

 

[holmburgers]

I'm thinking the subject will end up being as blurred as the background. When you pan in camera you follow the subject and mostly just the background blurs.

No doubt, but perhaps you could mask/dodge the subject and remove the mask after the pan. Either way, you'll get some "double exposure" on the subject. Though, I guess this will make exposure tricky as the masked area will be less exposed...

Hmmm...

Still, I think it's a cool idea and it's worth experimenting with. Hell, maybe you'll be a "dynamic enlargement" pioneer!

 

[brucemuir]

Exactly Holmmie,
I was thinking about a mask. I mean Uelsmann showed us that nothing is impossible

 

[hoffy]

Obviously, doing this kind of thing is best to get right in camera, but I think the whole idea of panning, getting a bit of a double exposure, but with the subject mainly sharp could look rather effective. I'd be interested to see how you go (If you do give it a try).

 

[greybeard]

It should be an interesting thing to try, but be aware that the effect of moving the negative image (in the enlarger) is fundamentally different from moving the positive image (in the camera). The reason for this is that in the latter case, the highlights blur into the shadows but the shadows do not blur into the highlights (they cannot "de-expose" the silver that records the presence of the highlights). When you are printing, it is the shadows which move into the highlights, unless you make an interpositive and internegative.

(This is the same phenomenology which makes a "soft focus" print made by diffusion in the enlarger look different from one made with a soft focus lens; to some eyes, the diffused enlargement looks downright spooky.)

If you try it, please let us know how it turns out!

 

[bsdunek]

Try rotating the easel around the subject you want sharp. It will only move a small amount while the edges and corners will move more. You only need to rotate back and forth about 30 degrees for the effect.