| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/25/2005 11:52:24 AM · #1 |
Hey guys, if you have photos that you used long exposure for them, would you mind sharing? I can do just fine in an object themed challenge, but for technical challenges, I'm still learning. So I just want to see some photos that used this technique. thanks!
Message edited by author 2005-07-25 11:52:48. |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 11:54:29 AM · #2 |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:00:06 PM · #3 |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:02:43 PM · #4 |
Well I consider this a long exposure, as evidenced by the effect, even though it was "only" 1/3 second. What do you think:
 |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:03:48 PM · #5 |
  
I got a couple more in my Northing Michigan Portfolio
|
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:04:05 PM · #6 |
This one...
...used a 30-second exposure. The landscape was lit entirely by the light of a half-moon. Normally you'd start to see short star trails at this exposure time, but the very short focal length makes them all but invisible (they can be seen on the full-resolution original).
|
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:04:21 PM · #7 |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:05:04 PM · #8 |
Not THAT long, but I would think it would still qualify.
Message edited by author 2005-07-25 12:05:44. |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:07:18 PM · #9 |
And what about this one at 1/20 of a second....
|
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:08:07 PM · #10 |
30 second exposure |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:11:07 PM · #11 |
TV was the only light source in a VERY dark room
Completely done with light painting
|
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:12:32 PM · #12 |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 12:13:36 PM · #13 |
30 Seconds
83 seconds
2 seconds |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 01:08:29 PM · #14 |
This one was fun (...if not pretty...;-)
This was a 90 second exposure.
Message edited by author 2005-07-25 14:07:51. |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 01:15:44 PM · #15 |
Maybe an obivious one - a night shot - 5 second exposure.  |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 01:16:12 PM · #16 |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 01:35:40 PM · #17 |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 01:38:03 PM · #18 |
Here are a couple from a local county fair:
3/10 second
1 second
|
|
|
|
07/25/2005 01:45:59 PM · #19 |
4 sec. |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 02:40:19 PM · #20 |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 02:42:59 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
And what about this one at 1/20 of a second....
|
Finally I have manual zoom. I can try this :)
|
|
|
|
07/25/2005 02:46:03 PM · #22 |
A few in here:
along with 1 second:
and a 12 second:
Message edited by author 2005-07-25 16:07:07. |
|
|
|
07/25/2005 02:48:28 PM · #23 |
Is this really a long exposure? It's a cool shot, but looks more like a special filter than long exposure - either that, or the football player runs without any up/down movement... ;^)
|
|
|
|
07/25/2005 02:52:50 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Is this really a long exposure? It's a cool shot, but looks more like a special filter than long exposure - either that, or the football player runs without any up/down movement... ;^)
|
Well considering that it is a platic figure that would probably limit it's realistic style of running. ;)
|
|
|
|
07/25/2005 03:02:02 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Is this really a long exposure? It's a cool shot, but looks more like a special filter than long exposure - either that, or the football player runs without any up/down movement... ;^)
|
The photographer's comments show how it was done. 1.4 second exposure.
R.
Message edited by author 2005-07-25 15:02:17.
|
|
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: 08/06/2025 06:47:56 AM EDT.
