| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/16/2004 09:39:55 AM · #1 |
each shot with a tripod on anywhere from 1/30 to 1/6 second exposure... experimenting is fun!
   
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 09:59:16 AM · #2 |
| I really like that first one alot. I like the longest shutter speed possible when it comes to moving water, even though it's a little cliche. |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 10:25:26 AM · #3 |
very nice. I like the 2nd and 4th a lot. mostly because they don't contain the man-made element. I especially like the 4th with the tree as a leading line. I'll bet you had fun taking these ;)
drake |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 10:27:49 AM · #4 |
Hey Laurie ... will your camera go longer? If so, unless you have wind that is causing other things to move (including your camera), go for something more like 2-4 seconds.
Of course, you may need to add a Neutral Density filter or something in order to slow the shutter down that much. Bare minimum, throw a polarizer on there to help with the reflections on the standing water.
Here's one with a 2.5 second exposure.
I might have gone longer except I was worried about a very slight wind moving the foliage.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 10:28:05 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by fstopopen:
very nice. I like the 2nd and 4th a lot. mostly because they don't contain the man-made element. I especially like the 4th with the tree as a leading line. I'll bet you had fun taking these ;)
drake |
It was quite a challenge (driving, climbing, hiking, falling, trespassing...oops), but WELL worth the effort. ;o) I am kinda pleased how things turned out. There are tons more pictures, but I haven't had a minute to get them processed. Can't wait to show them off! ;o)
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 10:30:05 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
Hey Laurie ... will your camera go longer? If so, unless you have wind that is causing other things to move (including your camera), go for something more like 2-4 seconds.
Of course, you may need to add a Neutral Density filter or something in order to slow the shutter down that much. Bare minimum, throw a polarizer on there to help with the reflections on the standing water.
|
...it will; I had no idea what I was doing, so this is a learning experience. I did use a polarizer. The only other filter I have is a skylight filter, which I was told to keep on my camera at all times, so it was on there too. I'll have more opportunities to experiment with longer shutter times, I think... thanks for the advice! ;o)
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 10:43:04 AM · #7 |
did you take any head-on? Also it can be quite effective when you concentrate / zoom in on a single rock. The detail in the water and it's use of motion can then be picked up much easier and come across quite dramatic.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 11:07:06 AM · #8 |
I really like the second one. It has perfect sharpness and a lot of motion blur to the water, the composition is more interesting to me and has a better light.
If your camera has a threaded lens and you put a ND filter, you can drive your shutter speed to very low, like 30s.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 11:09:00 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
did you take any head-on? Also it can be quite effective when you concentrate / zoom in on a single rock. The detail in the water and it's use of motion can then be picked up much easier and come across quite dramatic. |
This is the most head-on shot from that particular group of shots; I decided not to wade across the current (I'm a chicken) for a better angle!
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 11:26:12 AM · #10 |
Nice.
I would try to shoot at a later time of day or even another day for optimum results.
Being sunny and bright is probably the worst possible time for that type of picture.
I have only take one myself so I am no expert, but most of the printed versions are very cold looking (must be to get the detail and slow SS)
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 11:42:33 AM · #11 |
Thanks for your tips, Jon... the sun was in and out from behind clouds all evening; those were taken from between 6:00 and 8:00 pm, hoping for some of that beautiful sunset glow. I can't wait to try again... hopefully at a bigger waterfall.
Goodend: I'm going to look into getting an ND filter. My camera settings only go to a 16 second exposure, but I will have fun trying out different settings for the various results.
Thanks for all the tips and advice, guys! ;o)
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 11:54:08 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
Nice.
I would try to shoot at a later time of day or even another day for optimum results.
Being sunny and bright is probably the worst possible time for that type of picture.
I have only take one myself so I am no expert, but most of the printed versions are very cold looking (must be to get the detail and slow SS) |
It's never sunny in Wales!
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 11:55:19 AM · #13 |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 06:08:25 PM · #14 |
Had to add one more; not a waterfall but this is the sunset visible from the waterfall... wow. It was gorgeous! The photo really doesn't do it justice.
|
|
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: 09/12/2025 05:53:22 PM EDT.
