| Author |
Message |
AliceLC
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Jul 08 21:34 - Edited by: AliceLC
Reply
After the very good topic PERSPECTIVEEXPERIENCE I would like to see all your time exposure experience. The last day I took this 2 pics on a little river near at my housse and I wonder whitch one is the best? What is your opinion please?
|
Aline
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Jul 08 22:21
Reply
No doubt for me, I prefer the first one. It is a bit mistery, fairy. The water looks like steam, and the drops as clearly visible, and give life and movements.
So this picture, with its long exposure, is a very nice one.
Maybe the exposure is the weak point, as the shadows are very dark and the water too white. But you have a lot of excuses, exposure control in these conditions of deep contrast is very difficult.
|
ray9
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Jul 08 23:52 - Edited by: ray9
Reply
Hello,
my last experience with time exposure published was during my trip in the "mont st michel :
FocalLength: 135.0 mm
ISOSpeedRatings: 1600
ApertureValue: f/5.6
ExposureTime: 1/1 sec.
I forgot my tripod and I found a road sign to fix my camera and to not move during 1 sec (really long without move)
I like the first one for your shot ;o)
|
Vidar S
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Jul 08 00:04 - Edited by: Vidar S
Reply
Hard one. The first one shows very nice effect on the water, but the second picture shows more detail on the surrounding rocks. Sorry. Can't decide! 
|
|
Vidar S
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Jul 08 00:20 - Edited by: Vidar S
Reply
All my woophy "slow shutter".
Exposure time about 2 seconds
1 second exposure with flash. (i think it was rear curtain) The "tail" is enhanced a bit. 
5 second exposure
30 second exposure with grey filter
Slow shutter. Don't remember the exposure time
I think this is 1 second exposure
30 second exposure of a plane during take off
30 second exposure. The traffic close to where I live.
I almost forgot the reason for my woophy t-shirt! Picture #500000 uploaded to woophy.
|
A.Miguel Oliveira
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Jul 08 01:05
Reply
AliceLC, I prefer your first shot (for the water flow) and the second for the light...and has not a single word to add to what Aline said!!! Excellent her reasons!
I'll participate with some shots, then. Tomorrow I'll post them!
|
|
AliceLC
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Jul 08 15:16
Reply
Thanks you for your comments and yours shot (of course ).
Ray 9 I take same kind of pic in Lyon but I didn't have the time to post it. Le Mont saitn michel is a great place and your pic it's very nice.
Aline I thing you are right the first one it is a mystery.
Vidar S your photo n 4 and 5 are great!!! I love the effect like ghost! And I understand why you wan a woophy's teeshirt with the last pics. The colors are fabulous.
And Miguel I look forward to see your photo...
|
|
Vidar S
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Jul 08 15:27
Reply
Thank's Alice, but the reason I got the t-shirt is because it wass #500000 uploaded to woohpy 
Sorry. Forgot to mention! Hopefully taken care of now.
|
|
AliceLC
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Jul 08 17:58
Reply
ok but it's great shot too
|
Peter Kamphuis
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Jul 08 22:27
Reply
This is one I took with my new camera, during my vacation in France last month. Nothing special, but somehow I like the movement in combination with the sunset. (And as I heard, those things had been installed recently by my former employer, Siemens. That pulled my attention, too.)
(1/2 sec, f10, ISO 800)
The following three are still my own favourites. Just a lucky correct long exposure during a business trip in China.
(1 sec, f3.5, ISO 50)
(1/3 sec, f4.6, ISO 100)
(1 sec, f4.6, ISO 50)
- Peter
|
|
A.Miguel Oliveira
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Jul 08 23:55
Reply
For this excellent thread, here it's my contribution, Alice (hope you like it).
For ISO 100, here they are, in different kinds of shutter speeds utilisations (tripod for all pics except for first and last):
* For water flow, (from faster to slower speeds):
[1/10 sec , f:8.0]
[1/4 sec , f:7.1]
[1/3 sec , f:29.0]
[1 sec , f:16.0]
[1.3 sec , f:8.0]
* Moon
[1/4 sec, f:11.0]
* Cityscapes night shots, (from faster to slower speeds):
[1 sec , f:5.6]
[1.6 sec , f:5.6]
[6 sec , f:5.0]
* Horses mouvement
[1/6 sec , f:5.6]
|
|
AliceLC
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Jul 08 00:39
Reply
Cityscapes night shot are very nice!! Thank you Miguel and Peter!
I think I will experiment to take better shot with long exposure time (and buy a tripod)
|
|
A.Miguel Oliveira
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Jul 08 01:37
Reply
Alice, for your compact try a small flexible culmann tripod (no more than 10cm) which you can always have attached to the camera to hold it steadyer in your hand and use as a true tripod in many situations. For your Canon, don't forget also that a small bag of beans, in your car, can resolve the problems of speed (shutter, of course) for many situations!
Oh, and for long exposures, if you don't own a cable, use the delay button you use for self portraits (2 sec position is enough) not to shake at all, even with the tripod!
Enjoy!
Greets
Miguel
|
pansa
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Jul 08 12:51
Reply
Withoud doubt the first one. The essence of the photo is to show "floating" water and that is what it does.
|
cds
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Jul 08 13:09
Reply
I prefer the first one. I personally like the soft texture that flowing water gets in long exposure shots. Here are 2 of mine...
Crane in motion - construction site
Highway..
|
fotogravenswaay
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Jul 08 20:37
Reply
for me it is also the first one.....and you can lift it eventually up with levels and and curves in CS3.....
the fair is also a nice time to shoot long.......
20.0 mm.........½ second........at 100 iso
35.0 mm.....½ second.......at 100 iso
and if you want a really cheap and handy "tripod" you have to look AT THIS, and believe me ....it works!!
This was also discussed in a forum topic by Ruden Fretsbo
|
Jono
Member
|
# Posted: 22 Jul 08 08:42
Reply
I really love the effect a long exposure can give, particularly for night shots. I took these 3 during a recent trip to Melbourne, Australia. All were taken at an ISO of 100 and an exposure time of 30 seconds.
|
devish
Member
|
# Posted: 22 Jul 08 23:16
Reply
I prefer the first one as well.
Here are mine:
Star trail, 4 7 minute pictures attached together.
1.6 sec, I think?
8 sec.
8 sec.
|
Nivad
Member
|
# Posted: 27 Jul 08 10:03 - Edited by: Nivad
Reply
Interesting topic AliceLC
I prefer the second cause there is still some detail in the rocks.
Personally I was at a festival a week ago. Light conditions were, surprisingly , not that good and so I experienced the consequences of an low exposuretime:
Here were two effects wich became visible cause of the low exposure time although it was set at 1/40sec
First, the guitarmans gestures with his arms&hands were far to fast to get it frozen;
Secondly, with a focal length of 75mm, +- 110mm equivalent, there is some unsharpness caused by the disability to hold camera still for such a period.
Grtz
|
matz
Member
|
# Posted: 28 Jul 08 18:11
Reply
@ aliceLC: what might be of interest to you is the use of a greyscale-filter. not necassarily for the pictures you have presented here but if you are interested in that kind of play with the exposure and water for other pictures, e.g. waves coming in against a coast, beach, rocks.
maybe ou have already seen pictures of a sea coast where the water looks more like a mist covering the stones. usually then a greyscale filter was in use.
what it is: it is a filter tinted grey on the upper half and then gradually the grey gives way to the clear glass of the filter.
what it does: the problem you have with those kinds of pics is usually that with the long exposure time the upper half of the picture, like a sky a building aso get overexposed. now, if you use the greyscale and turn it so that the grey is in the upper half, less light comes through there, more light in the lower half where you usually have your flowing water and so both parts are well exposed.
hint: a greyscale can also be used to get a nicer blue sky when it is an exceptionally sunny day.
since in english is not my native language i hope i could be of any help with all that nonsense above
|
Online now: Guests - 2 Members - 1