| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/30/2006 01:08:39 AM · #1 |
| Just want to clarify. Am I trying to go for 1" or longer? |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 01:16:00 AM · #2 |
"Just how long is a normal exposure." ------ 1/60 sec. !!!
(j/k) :-P |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 01:17:31 AM · #3 |
That IS very strange wording in the challenge. To me, a "normal" exposure is whatever is the correct exposure, so by extension a "longer than normal" exposure would be an overexposure, meaning that this is the "Overexposure Challenge", but I'm sure that's not what they had in mind :-) It might have been better to say "longer than normal shutter speed", but that still begs the question of what is "normal"?
I think for all practical purposes to score well you'll have to have a shot that's obviously a long shutter speed, i.e. one with some sort of motion blur in it. Or night shots in general, of course, if they're good ones. I don't think a 15-second exposure of a studio still life would fit the bill in the voters' eyes.
But what do I know?
R. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 01:18:45 AM · #4 |
The last occurence of this challenge can give you some ideas
here
|
|
|
|
10/30/2006 01:20:25 AM · #5 |
i would say voters will likely look for:
1) movement/blurring of an object/person because of the slow shutter speed
or
2) night shot which is clearly lighter because of the slow shutter speed
my $.02 |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 01:23:04 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by taterbug:
"Just how long is a normal exposure." ------ 1/60 sec. !!!
(j/k) :-P |
Since a flash shot typically defaults to 1/60 that's what I was going to suggest as well ... that's about the slowest exposure with which you can stop motion and avoid camera shake.
I think this might have been better-phrased as "longer than typical" exposure. I'm sure the reason it was phrased this way was to avoid the problem we had last time when many people could not participate because their cameras were not capable of the specified exposure time. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 01:23:37 AM · #7 |
this is the shot I did for the last one. Of course, lots of great examples in that challenge. Could be a lot of fun! :-) |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 01:38:09 AM · #8 |
A real challenge would be to shoot something at 1/250 shutter speed and make it look like a long exposure. :P
|
|
|
|
10/30/2006 05:01:40 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I think this might have been better-phrased as "longer than typical" exposure. |
"Typical" is a synonym for "normal".
|
|
|
|
10/30/2006 05:24:13 PM · #10 |
| I am guessing that the apearance of movement is going to be crucial to avoid the DNMC crowd. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 06:06:33 PM · #11 |
So this was a six hour exposure.
That seems like a long one. DNMC ? :)
Message edited by author 2006-10-30 18:06:45. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 06:23:22 PM · #12 |
If it is a night shot, or an obvious low light shot then no problem. However if it was like this shot of mine that was 30" nobody will believe it, and they will say it DNMC because it could have been taken with light using a much shorter exposure.
My guess is that the images with obvious visuals that lead you to believe they were taken in very low light will score better. IE: movement, streaks of light, ect...
|
|
|
|
10/30/2006 06:30:46 PM · #13 |
| I think the real question here is where to draw the line between long exposure and really long exposure. I know I've loaded my dnmc shells and anything that looks longer than a 1.3 second exposure is getting both barrels. And don't even get me started on those bastards planning on submitting multiple exposures... |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 06:45:58 PM · #14 |
Wouldn't a "really long exposure" just be a subset of "long exposure"? I probably won't have time to throw any entries together thanks to the massive amount of studying I've got lately, but if I didn't I think I'd be staying the hell away from this challenge because no one is going to have the same definition of "longer than normal", and any photo that looks good will be accused of being properly exposed, heaven forbid... this looks like chaos in the making.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2006 07:51:40 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
I think the real question here is where to draw the line between long exposure and really long exposure. I know I've loaded my dnmc shells and anything that looks longer than a 1.3 second exposure is getting both barrels. And don't even get me started on those bastards planning on submitting multiple exposures... |
so, if I go to a waterfall and shoot a 6 sec. exposure you're going to DNMC me?
a 1 sec. exposure of that same scene wouldn't achieve the same effect, and therefor I wouldn't be adhering to the "create the impact of your image" portion of the challenge description.
Message edited by author 2006-10-30 19:52:05. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 08:16:16 PM · #16 |
Once, before this thing called The Internet came and sucked every ounce of intelligence from the masses, it was possible to convey humor and sarcasm in prose without having to append a bunch of extraneous characters to it.
I weep for the future.
Here is catering to the present:
Originally posted by routerguy:
I think the real question here is where to draw the line between long exposure and really long exposure. I know I've loaded my dnmc shells and anything that looks longer than a 1.3 second exposure is getting both barrels. And don't even get me started on those bastards planning on submitting multiple exposures...
edit: ;)
|
Message edited by author 2006-10-30 20:16:33. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 08:30:49 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Once, before this thing called The Internet came and sucked every ounce of intelligence from the masses, it was possible to convey humor and sarcasm in prose without having to append a bunch of extraneous characters to it.
I weep for the future.
Here is catering to the present:
Originally posted by routerguy:
I think the real question here is where to draw the line between long exposure and really long exposure. I know I've loaded my dnmc shells and anything that looks longer than a 1.3 second exposure is getting both barrels. And don't even get me started on those bastards planning on submitting multiple exposures...
edit: ;)
|
|
oh, I'm terribly sorry for being so stupid. I only took your reputation and well established history for voting low into consideration here.
Message edited by author 2006-10-30 20:31:30. |
|
|
|
10/30/2006 08:44:32 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by heathen:
oh, I'm terribly sorry for being so stupid. |
Apology accepted. Looking forward to another shot of the same scene with different coloring in the next Free Study. Good luck.
Message edited by author 2006-10-30 20:45:16. |
|
|
|
10/31/2006 01:44:13 AM · #19 |
Maybe they should've called it the "The running water, neutral density filter on your 50mm F/1.8 challenge"
|
|
|
|
10/31/2006 01:52:04 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
Maybe they should've called it the "The running water, neutral density filter on your 50mm F/1.8 challenge" |
A quick way to get a 4 from me. ok, maybe a 5 if it's good - if such a thing exists in that area.
Message edited by author 2006-10-31 01:52:23. |
|
|
|
10/31/2006 01:57:35 AM · #21 |
Ok...this thread has lost me!
|
|
|
|
10/31/2006 01:57:58 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by gazdi:
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
Maybe they should've called it the "The running water, neutral density filter on your 50mm F/1.8 challenge" |
A quick way to get a 4 from me. ok, maybe a 5 if it's good - if such a thing exists in that area. |
What, you don't like these type photos? I hope you don't think I meant tap water LOL.
|
|
|
|
10/31/2006 02:07:37 AM · #23 |
Not the best shot and processing, but guess how long the exposure was? |
|
|
|
10/31/2006 02:09:32 AM · #24 |
|
|
|
10/31/2006 04:49:39 AM · #25 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
Originally posted by gazdi:
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
Maybe they should've called it the "The running water, neutral density filter on your 50mm F/1.8 challenge" |
A quick way to get a 4 from me. ok, maybe a 5 if it's good - if such a thing exists in that area. |
What, you don't like these type photos?
|
Let's say it's hard to present something new with longexpo'd falls and streams. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/25/2025 05:21:35 PM EDT.
