long exposures drawback

Discussion in 'Photography' started by PeterN, Jul 21, 2013.

  1. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    I agree the the image sucks. I was only demonstrating to the Duck that
    the original blur was not a focus issue. Indeed I posted the original to
    illustrate when long exposure should not be used.
     
    PeterN, Jul 22, 2013
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    Besides, HDR would not allow the soft water effect I was looking for.
     
    PeterN, Jul 22, 2013
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. PeterN

    Eric Stevens Guest

    The intent behind it was to try out a new camera. :)

    Now that I think about it, it wasn't a long exposure: it was ten
    partial exposures assembled into the one final image.
     
    Eric Stevens, Jul 22, 2013
    #23
  4. PeterN

    Savageduck Guest

    ....but you didn't say that was your intent when you first posted the
    image. Refer to one of my other responses in this thread, where I
    posted this shot and gave some details. As I asked then; Is this the
    sort of thing you were trying to do?
    < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/DSC0991-E1w.jpg >
    I also maintain you are going about this incorrectly.
     
    Savageduck, Jul 22, 2013
    #24
  5. PeterN

    Mitch Bujard Guest

    Then it was an experiment. Understood. Such superimposition is usually
    used with much less partial exposures. It can actually create a nice
    cinematic effect. But in this instance, I would not go for a landscape.
    Go down the hill, find some boat sailing faster, and try superimposing
    at the rate of one picture a quarter second, or haf second. On a
    regata, it can be extremely nice.

    I need holidays (OT - Sigh - LOL)

    Mitch
    http://FontMenu.com
     
    Mitch Bujard, Jul 22, 2013
    #25
  6. PeterN

    Savageduck Guest

    This one is a little more extreme; Still ISO 200, but 1/6 sec. @ f/32.
    < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/DSC1002-E1w.jpg >

    Then we have 1/5 sec. @ f/36.
    < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/DSC1007-E1w.jpg >

    I believe what you are doing, stopping down & using a Variable density
    ND is compounding the effect forcing you to use a longer exposure time
    than you actually need. Remember The main purpose of using the Var-ND
    is to slow the exposure time and let you maintain a degree of control
    over DoF.
     
    Savageduck, Jul 22, 2013
    #26
  7. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    No. While it is a nice capture, I am seeking a somewhat different look.
    Open water requires a much longer exposure. When I have some time to
    review, I hope I have found something near the look I am seeking.
     
    PeterN, Jul 23, 2013
    #27
  8. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    I am using a Heliopan, which has ten stops. I have some exposures, where
    the capture has taken over one minute. To do that in broad daylight, one
    needs to stop way down. As I said earlier, I am learning an art form,
    not just a craft. There is no one size fits all. There are images that
    require less than 1/4 second. It's simply a matter of seeing and then
    adapting my shooting style to the image I seek. I forgot to add, at
    times I can be a slwo learner.
     
    PeterN, Jul 23, 2013
    #28
  9. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    I don't think it's the camera, so much as the nature of what we are
    trying to achieve. I should have realized, as bob Coe pointed out, that
    boats in the water will move during a long exposure. Now the problem is
    to take that physical fact, and make it work with us,, to create a work
    of art.
     
    PeterN, Jul 23, 2013
    #29
  10. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    Because not all images need to be tack sharp.
     
    PeterN, Jul 23, 2013
    #30
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.