PetaPixel

Beautiful Long Exposure Shots from a Japanese Train

Flickr user Céline Ramoni has a beautiful set of photographs shot from the Yurikamome rail line connecting the cities of Shimbashi and Toyosu in Japan. The exposure times aren’t too long (they’re all less than a second), but the speed of the train creates plenty of motion blur — even in daytime.

You can check out the rest of the photos in this Flickr set.

(via Colossal via Laughing Squid)


Image credits: Photographs by Céline Ramoni and used with permission


 
  • Cochese

    Those aren’t long exposures, they are motion blur. None of them are more than about a half of a second.

  • Yitzy

    why aren’t the buildings blurred ?? (in the 2 first pics here)

    looks like a double exposure to me..

  • Yitzy

    why aren’t the buildings blurred ?? (in the 2 first pics here)

    looks like a double exposure to me..

  • Yitzy

    why aren’t the buildings blurred ?? (in the 2 first pics here)

    looks like a double exposure to me..

  • Yitzy

    why aren’t the buildings blurred ?? (in the 2 first pics here)

    looks like a double exposure to me..

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    Thanks for the feedback. I think the question is whether “long exposure” refers more to the result than the actual amount of time the shutter was open for. If it’s the latter, then you’re correct, but if it’s the former, then “long exposure” exposure times are relative.

    For example, if I took a neutral density filter and shot a 10 second photo out in a parking lot where absolutely nothing is moving, then it would technically be a long exposure photo that looks just like any other photo taken at 1/125. However, a 1 second exposure of a busy freeway would definitely seem more like a long exposure photo, right?

    Just my thoughts. Thanks again :)

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    Thanks for the feedback. I think the question is whether “long exposure” refers more to the result than the actual amount of time the shutter was open for. If it’s the latter, then you’re correct, but if it’s the former, then “long exposure” exposure times are relative.

    For example, if I took a neutral density filter and shot a 10 second photo out in a parking lot where absolutely nothing is moving, then it would technically be a long exposure photo that looks just like any other photo taken at 1/125. However, a 1 second exposure of a busy freeway would definitely seem more like a long exposure photo, right?

    Just my thoughts. Thanks again :)

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    Thanks for the feedback. I think the question is whether “long exposure” refers more to the result than the actual amount of time the shutter was open for. If it’s the latter, then you’re correct, but if it’s the former, then “long exposure” exposure times are relative.

    For example, if I took a neutral density filter and shot a 10 second photo out in a parking lot where absolutely nothing is moving, then it would technically be a long exposure photo that looks just like any other photo taken at 1/125. However, a 1 second exposure of a busy freeway would definitely seem more like a long exposure photo, right?

    Just my thoughts. Thanks again :)

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    Thanks for the feedback. I think the question is whether “long exposure” refers more to the result than the actual amount of time the shutter was open for. If it’s the latter, then you’re correct, but if it’s the former, then “long exposure” exposure times are relative.

    For example, if I took a neutral density filter and shot a 10 second photo out in a parking lot where absolutely nothing is moving, then it would technically be a long exposure photo that looks just like any other photo taken at 1/125. However, a 1 second exposure of a busy freeway would definitely seem more like a long exposure photo, right?

    Just my thoughts. Thanks again :)

  • http://www.facebook.com/samueljerichow Samuel Jerichow

    Close buildings are blurred, far seem to be not (they are a liiiiiiiittle) The more the objects move in relation to the camera, the more they are blurred. The track is made of self similar elements and is blurred in the same direction of their alignment, so it partially seems not blurred, but it is.

    This could be done with long exposure. If you set a low light sensitivity. And as the headline sais highspeed train, you dont need long time to get such images. “Long” is relative.

  • http://www.facebook.com/samueljerichow Samuel Jerichow

    Close buildings are blurred, far seem to be not (they are a liiiiiiiittle) The more the objects move in relation to the camera, the more they are blurred. The track is made of self similar elements and is blurred in the same direction of their alignment, so it partially seems not blurred, but it is.

    This could be done with long exposure. If you set a low light sensitivity. And as the headline sais highspeed train, you dont need long time to get such images. “Long” is relative.

  • http://twitter.com/zeptom Joakim Bidebo

    Whatever you wanna call it, like it. First and last are my favorites.

  • http://twitter.com/zeptom Joakim Bidebo

    Whatever you wanna call it, like it. First and last are my favorites.

  • Typeinmichael

    Pretty cool, though how did he get the shot from the back?  I’ve been on the speed train but I could only shoot from the passenger window on the side.  Nice.

  • Seriesrover

    Yeah I tend to agree with that – long exposures are long shutter speeds relative to the amount of light being captured.  Motion blur is determined by how much is moving in the scene whilst shutter is open.  One uses long exposures to achieve motion blur.

    For star trails (motion blur) at night you’d use a long exposure of 20 mins for example. On a bullet train, half a second is all that is necessary.

  • Seriesrover

    Yeah I tend to agree with that – long exposures are long shutter speeds relative to the amount of light being captured.  Motion blur is determined by how much is moving in the scene whilst shutter is open.  One uses long exposures to achieve motion blur.

    For star trails (motion blur) at night you’d use a long exposure of 20 mins for example. On a bullet train, half a second is all that is necessary.

  • http://www.teknisyan.net Teknisyan

    vantage point of the Superman and Flash when running or moving very fast!!! :)

  • Pixeljournal

    The buildings are blurred, but they don’t appear so because of the relative distance to the camera, so the blur is far less than it is on the objects closer to the camera.

  • Yitzy

    that makes sense…

  • Yitzy

    that makes sense…

  • http://twitter.com/fotoamater_com Radovan Rasho Pavlic

    I lived on Odaiba, meaning halfway through this line, so I’m superfamiliar with the train and everything, so a few small things are slightly wrong in this text…
    Allow me to do some hair-splitting':
    This is not a hi-speed train, it runs at about 100 km/h roughly, give or take 10 km/h. And it’s actually more of a computer driven bus with couple of trailers, than a classic train (no rails, wheels of the train are regular rubber tires, etc.). Since the thing is computer-driven, there is no driver and you can sit in the front and do what this girl did, also on the last car (if you are able to chase the kids and the “obachan” away from this supercool seats). Shimbashi and Toyosu are just parts of Tokyo, Shimbashi is actually the place where the first train track in Japan used to be…
    Bottom line, great shots…

  • http://twitter.com/fotoamater_com Radovan Rasho Pavlic

    I lived on Odaiba, meaning halfway through this line, so I’m superfamiliar with the train and everything, so a few small things are slightly wrong in this text…
    Allow me to do some hair-splitting':
    This is not a hi-speed train, it runs at about 100 km/h roughly, give or take 10 km/h. And it’s actually more of a computer driven bus with couple of trailers, than a classic train (no rails, wheels of the train are regular rubber tires, etc.). Since the thing is computer-driven, there is no driver and you can sit in the front and do what this girl did, also on the last car (if you are able to chase the kids and the “obachan” away from this supercool seats). Shimbashi and Toyosu are just parts of Tokyo, Shimbashi is actually the place where the first train track in Japan used to be…
    Bottom line, great shots…

  • http://twitter.com/fotoamater_com Radovan Rasho Pavlic

    I lived on Odaiba, meaning halfway through this line, so I’m superfamiliar with the train and everything, so a few small things are slightly wrong in this text…
    Allow me to do some hair-splitting':
    This is not a hi-speed train, it runs at about 100 km/h roughly, give or take 10 km/h. And it’s actually more of a computer driven bus with couple of trailers, than a classic train (no rails, wheels of the train are regular rubber tires, etc.). Since the thing is computer-driven, there is no driver and you can sit in the front and do what this girl did, also on the last car (if you are able to chase the kids and the “obachan” away from this supercool seats). Shimbashi and Toyosu are just parts of Tokyo, Shimbashi is actually the place where the first train track in Japan used to be…
    Bottom line, great shots…

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    Thanks for the corrections Radovan. Edited accordingly :)

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    Thanks for the corrections Radovan. Edited accordingly :)

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    Thanks for the corrections Radovan. Edited accordingly :)

  • STEF
  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=753423197 Rašo Pavlić

    Awesome to see a site admin following up on comments, great job Michael…