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
    1. Advertisements

  2. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    Besides, HDR would not allow the soft water effect I was looking for.
    PeterN, Jul 22, 2013
    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
  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
  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 Bujard, Jul 22, 2013
  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
  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
  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
  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
  10. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    Because not all images need to be tack sharp.
    PeterN, Jul 23, 2013
    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.