Taking pictures handheld; some neuromechanical aspects

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And I am using my tripod with cable release.

Now, if someone could switch off the wind around here, especially in the spring! :eek.

 

(I realize I'm posting too much so I'll stop soon.)

 

An umbrella to block the wind is very handy.

 

Bob said:

Didn't they ban the use of beta blockers in some sports eg shooting, snooker etc as these reduce anxiety and natural tremor.

 

I wouldn't be surprised! Some actors use Beta Blockers to reduce stage shakes. It doesn't do much for anxiety. It is not prescribed as a mood altering drug. I'm on Beta Blockers as part of my cardiac therapy. It does help the tremor, too.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[pico]

Last word, I promise.

 

In the late Barry Thornton's book Edge of Darkness page 65 has a great demonstration of the effects of hand-held, light and heavy tripods. It's worth looking at. Even the heavy tripod shows signs of camera movement at 1 second with mirror lock up! The lighter tripod would probably show better results at 1/125th of a second with a Leica. The shutter and mirror flop each contribute to shake at that speed. Longer exposures represent more of the image than mirror flop time does.

[Ellie]

Interesting article!

 

I've often seen photo journalists (or perhaps street bloggers) leaning forward in a low position, to get the best view angle. It can't be an ideal body position but I guess it's a compromise and they probably uses both short shutter times and camera stabilization.

[k-hawinkler]

 

An umbrella to block the wind is very handy.

 

 

 

Sure, if you can hang on to the umbrella! :D

[Guest Ornello]

Last word, I promise.

 

In the late Barry Thornton's book Edge of Darkness page 65 has a great demonstration of the effects of hand-held, light and heavy tripods. It's worth looking at. Even the heavy tripod shows signs of camera movement at 1 second with mirror lock up! The lighter tripod would probably show better results at 1/125th of a second with a Leica. The shutter and mirror flop each contribute to shake at that speed. Longer exposures represent more of the image than mirror flop time does.

 

Leicaflex cameras have a cam mechanism that all but eliminates mirror slap. I don't know if R models kept this feature.

[Lindolfi]

Last word, I promise.

 

In the late Barry Thornton's book Edge of Darkness page 65 has a great demonstration of the effects of hand-held, light and heavy tripods. It's worth looking at. Even the heavy tripod shows signs of camera movement at 1 second with mirror lock up! The lighter tripod would probably show better results at 1/125th of a second with a Leica. The shutter and mirror flop each contribute to shake at that speed. Longer exposures represent more of the image than mirror flop time does.

 

That is a whole new issue that is worth to study: the interplay between the properties of the tripod and the vibrations introduced by the camera (mirror and shutter). I've done some measurements and it appears that camera/tripod combinations have fundamental frequencies which are different around the three axes of rotation of the camera (yaw, pitch, roll). Those vibrations are often damped quite well. But if you have a shutter time that is in the neighbourhood of one swing of the camera in one of the modes of vibration, you have a problem. It appears that long exposures and very short ones are OK, but around 1/15 - 1/30 of a second can be a real problem, since the camera starts the vibration due to the mirror movement and/or shutter action and when the shutter is open, the tripod is really rotating. There is no time to wash out the effect as in long exposure times. With very short times, the tripod/camera combination has not started to rotate yet.

 

This effect can be so dominant that an M9 on a 2000mm f/10 lens can not be used for astronomy on a very heavy tripod (20 kg). Surprising for a camera that has no mirror! Ofcourse 2000mm is very revealing. A Canon 5DII with liveview or mirror lockup gives no problems.

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

HI Bert,

 

In practical terms, do these factors reveal themselves at particular shutter speeds on the M9 with specific focal lengths?

 

Cheers

John

[Lindolfi]

Yes John. A longer lens brings down the resonance frequencies and make the effects more visible. In short: very long lenses 800 mm and longer is bad and medium lenses (75-135mm) at 1/15-1/30 is bad on a spaghetti tripod. A light good quality carbon tripod (for instance Gitzo G1028) gives no problems with a cable release up to and including 135mm with the M9 is my experience at all exposure times without wind and with stable floor.

[k-hawinkler]

That is a whole new issue that is worth to study: the interplay between the properties of the tripod and the vibrations introduced by the camera (mirror and shutter). I've done some measurements and it appears that camera/tripod combinations have fundamental frequencies which are different around the three axes of rotation of the camera (yaw, pitch, roll). Those vibrations are often damped quite well. But if you have a shutter time that is in the neighbourhood of one swing of the camera in one of the modes of vibration, you have a problem. It appears that long exposures and very short ones are OK, but around 1/15 - 1/30 of a second can be a real problem, since the camera starts the vibration due to the mirror movement and/or shutter action and when the shutter is open, the tripod is really rotating. There is no time to wash out the effect as in long exposure times. With very short times, the tripod/camera combination has not started to rotate yet.

 

This effect can be so dominant that an M9 on a 2000mm f/10 lens can not be used for astronomy on a very heavy tripod (20 kg). Surprising for a camera that has no mirror! Ofcourse 2000mm is very revealing. A Canon 5DII with liveview or mirror lockup gives no problems.

 

 

Of course, atmospheric turbulence can get in the way as well, particularly on hot days and while looking horizontally through the atmosphere. But adaptive optics and guide stars have been invented for a reason.

 

Back to mirrorless and liveview. I have been using a Sony NEX-5N with Leitz/Leica V- and R-lenses and APO-Extenders-R, yielding a virtual focal length of up to close to 10 meters. With the right seeing conditions (early morning or evening, night) and no wind one can get an almost stable image on the LCD screen with 9.5x magnification.

 

So, I hope to see liveview in a future M10 as well.

[haroldp]

This is interesting. Two points occur to me:

 

• As a rifleman and pistolero (well, ex-) I was taught breathing control. We all felt this made a difference. Well, the difference could be measured in target points, the difficulty was to sort out the casuses and the effects. What is the opinion on that?

 

• Also as a rifleman, I learnt to use sling support and adapted that technique to photography. I have found it helpful. What it does is essentially fusing the shoulders and the camera into one unit; I presume it does shorten the postural chain; am I right in that?

 

Another lesson was that conscious attention to the tool (gun, camera) and on posture and the trigger finger invariably lead to bad results, usually pulling the shot. All experienced shots do agree with the Zen archers: You must be one with the target. This of course brings in the mental aspect.

 

Shooting and alcohol: Some shooters can benefit from a beer. But this just diminishes the nervousness that plays havoc with their trigger control, it does never lead to good scores, and it is bad for your coordination. The problem has to be attacked at its root.

 

LB

 

I am an active target shooter and was a successful competitive shooter ( Smallbore Free Rifle, Centerfire Match Rifle and Service Rifle ). Everything Lars says is accurate, but I would add that the thought of mixing alcohol (or drugs) with firearms gives me the willies, and neither the teams I competed on, nor I, when acting as range officer would have allowed any person we thought was affected to shoot. As range officer I was called upon to eject any person who I thought was a risk to safety.

 

Referees would certainly not have allowed them to compete.

 

Regards ... Harold

[lars_bergquist]

Harold – my reaction to alcolhol on the range is identical to yours. I was never referring to levels where anybody would be visibly affected or even fail a blow test.

 

It is a fact that many years ago a controlled experiment was done in Sweden with quite small intakes. The result as I remember it was that at the very lowest intake, the results of some shooters (the nervously afflicted, I presume) improved somewhat, but that those of the best shooters got worse. A slight increase from that level did show that muscular micro-coordination went haywire.

 

The problem is of course that many people do not even need alcohol. A couple of days ago there was a robbery of a jewelry store in downtown Stockholm. A gaggle of policemen arrived just as the robbers left the store. They reported over the radio that they had been fired on, and the result was what the Army disdainfully calls "a firefest". Several bullets went into a gym; fortunately, nobody was hit. Afterwards, it leaked that all the bullets had been fired from police weapons, and that the robbers, who were soon caught, were actually armed with dummy guns! So good old adrenalin can do the job too.

 

LB

[pgk]

Many years ago I used to shoot pistol competitively (now banned in the UK). I remember that many competition pistols had hangrips built for the individual shooter's hand - to ensure that points of contact were all designed to transmit any motion from the hand so that it was in line with the barrel. I've actually thought about trying to produce a grip for the M which is designed to do the same thing (but of course here in the UK no one needs such pistol grips so the ideal people to make such grips have long since given up). I notice that Alpa offer a variety of 'standard' grips which look interestingly shaped for their modular camera system.

[haroldp]

Harold – my reaction to alcolhol on the range is identical to yours. I was never referring to levels where anybody would be visibly affected or even fail a blow test.

 

It is a fact that many years ago a controlled experiment was done in Sweden with quite small intakes. The result as I remember it was that at the very lowest intake, the results of some shooters (the nervously afflicted, I presume) improved somewhat, but that those of the best shooters got worse. A slight increase from that level did show that muscular micro-coordination went haywire.

 

The problem is of course that many people do not even need alcohol. A couple of days ago there was a robbery of a jewelry store in downtown Stockholm. A gaggle of policemen arrived just as the robbers left the store. They reported over the radio that they had been fired on, and the result was what the Army disdainfully calls "a firefest". Several bullets went into a gym; fortunately, nobody was hit. Afterwards, it leaked that all the bullets had been fired from police weapons, and that the robbers, who were soon caught, were actually armed with dummy guns! So good old adrenalin can do the job too.

 

LB

 

Lars:

 

What you say makes perfect sense.

 

As you know, the key(s) are breath control and position support to make a tripod out of your skeleton (elbow, hip etc).

 

One of the most useful techniques we were taught was to relax in the position, and then adjust the entire body so that in a relaxed state, you were naturally aiming at or near the target therefore requiring a minimum of muscle to keep on target.

 

I use that, and the surprise shot in my photography even today.

 

The most common cause of not allowing people to shoot for safety reasons had nothing to do with substances, and were primarily a casual attitude and refusal to follow the rules. Far to often these were by police officers who were used to casual handling of firearms, and rules not applying to them.

 

As one of three certified instructors in the club I rotated duty as range officer, but when I was not, I followed the rules like any other member or guest.

 

I was always impressed with how well countries like Sweden or Switzerland did in competition despite their small populations.

 

Regards ... Harold

[Guest Ornello]

Lars:

 

What you say makes perfect sense.

 

As you know, the key(s) are breath control and position support to make a tripod out of your skeleton (elbow, hip etc).

 

One of the most useful techniques we were taught was to relax in the position, and then adjust the entire body so that in a relaxed state, you were naturally aiming at or near the target therefore requiring a minimum of muscle to keep on target.

 

I use that, and the surprise shot in my photography even today.

 

The most common cause of not allowing people to shoot for safety reasons had nothing to do with substances, and were primarily a casual attitude and refusal to follow the rules. Far to often these were by police officers who were used to casual handling of firearms, and rules not applying to them.

 

As one of three certified instructors in the club I rotated duty as range officer, but when I was not, I followed the rules like any other member or guest.

 

I was always impressed with how well countries like Sweden or Switzerland did in competition despite their small populations.

 

Regards ... Harold

 

One thing is to keep your feet well apart to increase stability and reduce the effort of your brain and muscles to stabilize yourself.

[jaapv]

and reduce the effort of your brain and muscles to stabilize yourself.

If I do that I fall flat on my face...

[Guest Ornello]

If I do that I fall flat on my face...

 

Oh, are you Romanian?

 

 

PS: I have many Romanian friends and they are always making jokes about how bad their country is...

[pico]

Harold – my reaction to alcolhol on the range is identical to yours. I was never referring to levels where anybody would be visibly affected or even fail a blow test.

 

It is a fact that many years ago a controlled experiment was done in Sweden with quite small intakes. The result as I remember it was that at the very lowest intake, the results of some shooters (the nervously afflicted, I presume) improved somewhat, but that those of the best shooters got worse.

 

By nervously afflicted I hope you mean something like anxious. By your age I would think you have a tremor of some kind. No?

[pico]

Many years ago I used to shoot pistol competitively (now banned in the UK). I remember that many competition pistols had hangrips built for the individual shooter's hand - to ensure that points of contact were all designed to transmit any motion from the hand so that it was in line with the barrel. [...]

 

Years ago I was a long-range metallic silhouette shooter. Our club did not permit prone shooting of any kind (good old New Mexico). Of course, the handguns had to have a lot of power to knock down the heavy iron targets, so recoil was an issue. The very worst handgun was the one which directed recoil straight back into the hand (the TC Contender). It would beat you up. Strangely, the best for me were the old Western six-shooter style revolvers. I would demonstrate using a Ruger Super Blackhawk 44 Magnum (my own very hot loads) with slippery pearl grips how one can shoot it safely by holding the grip with just two fingers - just let the recoil roll/pivot straight up. Do that consistently and all is well. (I would not try the same with a handgun with more recoil lest the hammer spur stabs your hand.)

 

I was no good with light target pistols so I defer to your expertise there. We had some astounding small caliber shooters - such that a roll of paper was slowly passed behind the targets to show when a bullet went through a previous shot's hole.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[haroldp]

- such that a roll of paper was slowly passed behind the targets to show when a bullet went through a previous shot's hole.

 

That is typically done for benchrest shooting where the spread of 5 shots at 100 yards is often less than 0.1 in.

 

.... H

[pico]

That is typically done for benchrest shooting where the spread of 5 shots at 100 yards is often less than 0.1 in.

 

.... H

 

Yes! I remember that. Amazing stuff. That's where I learned with the unfortunate TC Contender to let the action seat the bullet into the lands. (Bullet was not crimped in, and extended a bit over a compressed load.) Not that it helped me shoot better! And I used a bench loader, measured ball powder carefully, used same weighted bullets.... but like using a Leica it did not make me a better shooter. Gosh I hated that weapon. Incidentally, this was in Roswell, New Mexico where wildcat rounds were always being made. But that's too OT.

 

Oh, when I went to trade in my Super Blackhawk the dealer said, "This is the first flame-cut force cone I've ever seen on one of these" and gave me one heck of a good trade in. (Although you probably recall it was a real problem with the defunct 357 Super Magnum.)