Help with long exposures and water

Mitchell · March 21, 2005

I'm looking for some advice on how to shoot long exposures of moving water at the beach. I'm looking for that foggy effect that you can get when the water is in motion over a long exposure.

A few questions. When I tried this yesterday in the afternoon, there was just too much light. I closed my aperture all the way down and used the highest ISO setting, but my shutterspeed was still way to fast for the desired effect. I then tried it at twilight, but with shutterspeeds of several seconds, it was still too dark to appreciate the effect. Perhaps I waited too long.

I have seen this effect with flowing water and daytime lighting. How is it done?

mitch

Shay Stephens · March 21, 2005

A 10 stop neutral density filter (nd 3.0) will let you shoot a long exposure in bright sunlight.

Mitchell · March 21, 2005

Thanks for the quick reply, Shay. I had a feeling that a filter was the answer here. Is that really all there is too it??

mitch

wxwax · March 21, 2005

It just cuts down on the amount of light coming in, allows you to make long exposures.

One thing I appreciated when I was shooting with the G3 is that it had a built-in neutral density filter. After Patch29 showed me the shot, it allowed me to get traffic trails.

Mitchell · March 21, 2005

Ordering one right now. Can't wait to try this out.

mitch

LiquidOps · March 21, 2005

Shay Stephens wrote:

A 10 stop neutral density filter (nd 3.0) will let you shoot a long exposure in bright sunlight.

Shay,

Is this what you are referring to? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=8113&is=REG

or am I looking at the wrong thing?

I have a Sony 717. What do you recommend?

wxwax · March 21, 2005

LiquidOps wrote:

Shay,

Is this what you are referring to? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=8113&is=REG

or am I looking at the wrong thing?

I have a Sony 717. What do you recommend?

Here.

Shay Stephens · March 21, 2005

Yes, exactly, the 58mm ND3.0 filter will fit the 7x7 or the 828. You can get a 2 second exposure with that thing in bright daylight :-)

Different cameras and or lenses will require different size filter threads. So buy the filter with the correct lens thread size. The 7x7/828 uses a 58mm lens thread.

LiquidOps wrote:

Shay,

Is this what you are referring to? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=8113&is=REG

or am I looking at the wrong thing?

I have a Sony 717. What do you recommend?

LiquidOps · March 21, 2005

wxwax wrote:

Here.

Thanks Waxy

Should I got with the sony one, or is there a better brand?

Steven

Shay Stephens · March 21, 2005

The thing to watch is how strong the filter is. You want to verify that whatever filter you buy it has the strength you need (e.g. 10 stop or nd3.0). I couldn't find the strength of the Sony filter.

LiquidOps wrote:

Thanks Waxy

Should I got with the sony one, or is there a better brand?

Steven

Mitchell · March 21, 2005

gotta love the B&H site. Plug in ND3, 67mm, any brand, and up pops your selection. I am ordering a B&W for $69. Even confirmed Shay's suggestion that this was the equivalent of 10 stops.

Now that's user friendly!

mitch

Jekyll & Hyde · March 21, 2005

Mitchell wrote:

I closed my aperture all the way down and used the highest ISO setting

J: BTW, use the lowest ISO setting.

H: And perhaps throw a polarizer into the mix. There are several benefits.
J&H

gubbs · March 22, 2005

Mitchell wrote:

I then tried it at twilight, but with shutterspeeds of several seconds, it was still too dark to appreciate the effect. Perhaps I waited too long.

mitch

Mitchell if it was too dark to apreciate you may just be underexposing.

Whilst it's not the best example this shot was taken after sunset at iso 100 f16 52 seconds.

This book is also very useful for low light stuff

ridetwistyroads · March 22, 2005

The best tip anyone can offer is to go shoot a bunch of low light/long exposure shots. Learn about them through trial and error, and you'll never learn it better. There's alot worse ways to spend an evening them waiting for your camera to go "click................................................................................................................................................ click!"

Keep in mind that a totally dark subject will be hard to get any color/contrast to. Some, if only a tiny tiny tiny bit, is needed to keep it interesting. Otherwise, the effect is lessoned. (imho.)

Mitchell · March 22, 2005

gubbs wrote:

Mitchell if it was too dark to apreciate you may just be underexposing.

Whilst it's not the best example this shot was taken after sunset at iso 100 f16 52 seconds.

This book is also very useful for low light stuff

Nice pic, Gubbs, and thanks for the reply. I guess I could have increased the exposure some for my night pics. I just didn't know what to expect with such long exposures. As it is, my wife thinks I am nuts standing out on the beach with my tripod and remote control. To quote her, "Isn't it just dark out there?" This coming from a radiologist who should know a thing or two about film and exposure times!

Well I really showed her with my overexposed daytime shots and my underexposed night shots!!

landrum · March 22, 2005

Okay, now this is a little different, but I suspect that there will be a similar fix. I recently took some portraits on a rediculously bright day. Even using a polorizing filter, they are blown WAY out. I was near water, (as it was part of the background), and I guess it was close enough for the reflections to burn my subjects out.

My questions is: What filter will block enough of this light to take a regularly timed exposure and avoid my having to spend HOURS in post to replace backgrounds and fix each photo? Would I use it in lieu of the polorizer or in addition? Is there a short list of must have filters for outdoor photography?

Thank you in advance for any assistance! (sorry for hijacking your thread Mitch!)

Jekyll & Hyde · March 22, 2005

landrum wrote:

I recently took some portraits on a rediculously bright day.

J: Do you have an example?

H: A picture is worth a thousand guesses.

J&H

landrum · March 22, 2005

I meant to attach photos....oops!

F2.8, ISO 100, .005 sec

F2.8, ISO 100, .02sec

Taken with an Olympus C8080wz. I am actually embarassed to show these, as they are probably my worst work ever!

Pre-Thanks again!

pathfinder · March 22, 2005

landrum wrote:

I meant to attach photos....oops!

F2.8, ISO 100, .005 sec
F2.8, ISO 100, .02sec

Taken with an Olympus C8080wz. I am actually embarassed to show these, as they are probably my worst work ever!

Pre-Thanks again!

I don't think you need a filter to darken anything - if you use a ND filter, then your subjects ( already under exposed) will still be under exposed. If you cannot move from the strong backlighting, why not add some fill flash in the forground to balance the lighting or use a reflector to add some light to their faces and balance better with the light behind them?

wxwax · March 22, 2005

Exactly! They're backlit. Either change the background to something darker, or light up yer subjects with a flash.

JamesJWeg · March 22, 2005

ridetwistyroads wrote:

The best tip anyone can offer is to go shoot a bunch of low light/long exposure shots. Learn about them through trial and error, and you'll never learn it better. There's alot worse ways to spend an evening them waiting for your camera to go "click................................................................................................................................................ click!"

Keep in mind that a totally dark subject will be hard to get any color/contrast to. Some, if only a tiny tiny tiny bit, is needed to keep it interesting. Otherwise, the effect is lessoned. (imho.)

Yeah, gotta love those long ones, I was running 10 - 30 sec's last night.

James.

Jekyll & Hyde · March 22, 2005

landrum wrote:

I am actually embarassed to show these, as they are probably my worst work ever!

J: Two rules to live by (in these forums):

1. If you want to improve, never be afraid to post your worst photos.
2. If you want to improve further, never be afraid to post your best photos.

H: I'm glad you posted. You are now free to improve.

landrum wrote:

I recently took some portraits on a rediculously bright day. Even using a polorizing filter, they are blown WAY out. I was near water, (as it was part of the background), and I guess it was close enough for the reflections to burn my subjects out.

J: Always think of light as your best friend, not as an enemy to be dealt with. It's a subtle change in thinking, but it'll allow you to see opportunity where before there was just frustration.

H: Sometimes you have to work with the light that you have. Reposition the subject, reposition yourself. Get a good angle. Sometimes a little fill flash will do the trick. Whichever it is, make it work for you.

J: You've made a good move here by positioning your subjects in the open shade. You controlled the light falling on your subjects. I might suggest moving them a bit so that the illumination is a little directional (more light coming from one side or the other) so that they aren't quite so flat. Or whip out that handy folding reflector you always carry! :giggle
OK, forget that last one.

H: Your shooting position will now determine what the background will be. If your background is in full sun, then it will likely get blown out, and no filter in the world can make up for that great a difference in lighting. The polarizer you are using might help a little with reflective surfaces (like water), but the basic rules of exposure still apply. Moving around is still the best option, but watch out for those trees growing out of heads!

J: Now if you decide to use fill flash, then you have a bit more control, but the look of the picture will certainly change (especially if you plan to make a drastic difference in foreground/background light level). Use manual exposure with your Oly, and adjust the exposure until you like the look.

H: You can control a lot of the elements in a photograph, and some you just can't. I hope this has helped you some.

Remember, sometimes you just have to let the light do what it will.
J&H

gubbs · March 23, 2005

landrum wrote:

I meant to attach photos....oops!

F2.8, ISO 100, .005 sec
F2.8, ISO 100, .02sec

Taken with an Olympus C8080wz. I am actually embarassed to show these, as they are probably my worst work ever!

Pre-Thanks again!

Your onboard flash would sort those out. I took this in similar circumstances with my c8080 (great camera btw) using the flash to balance the light

Ckick on the pick for full exif details
Cheers

Mitchell · March 23, 2005

landrum wrote:

Okay, now this is a little different, but I suspect that there will be a similar fix. I recently took some portraits on a rediculously bright day. Even using a polorizing filter, they are blown WAY out. I was near water, (as it was part of the background), and I guess it was close enough for the reflections to burn my subjects out.

My questions is: What filter will block enough of this light to take a regularly timed exposure and avoid my having to spend HOURS in post to replace backgrounds and fix each photo? Would I use it in lieu of the polorizer or in addition? Is there a short list of must have filters for outdoor photography?

Thank you in advance for any assistance! (sorry for hijacking your thread Mitch!)

Hey, you hijacked my thread!!!:cry

I can't remember where i read this, but most of us don't use flash often enough outdoors. I have tried to correct this in my own outdoor photography, and I have noticed a great improvement in my lighting and exposure. I generally set my on camera flash to "fill" in these backlit situations.

HTH,
mitch

landrum · March 23, 2005

Thank you to all for your advise. I did try some with a flash, but I thought they were too harsh looking. I suppose that is easier to fix than the backlighting....

Better yet, I just need to figure out the settings on my flash!

Jekyll, I actually do have a reflector and I ran out without it that day. :bash I just recently bought it so I still forget to use it.

Thanks again, everyone!

Jekyll & Hyde · March 23, 2005

landrum wrote:

I did try some with a flash, but I thought they were too harsh looking... Better yet, I just need to figure out the settings on my flash!

J: Experiment a bit with your flash. See what settings will allow you to add just a hint of fill. Might be the "Slow Sync" or "Fill" modes. You might also be a be able to adjust flash power (either with the built-in flash or a TTL flash).

H: If you have an external flash and can use it in manual, then that's the best bet (If you are able to take the time to adjust and readjust settings). A diffuser of some sort will help to soften the light some too.

landrum wrote:

Jekyll, I actually do have a reflector and I ran out without it that day. :bash I just recently bought it so I still forget to use it.

J: OMG you Do have one! Bright girl!

H: "Is that a reflector in your pocket? Or are you just glad to see me?"

J&H

TOF guy · March 26, 2005

landrum wrote:

I am actually embarassed to show these, as they are probably my worst work ever!

I would not feel embarrassed at all, because one could argue that in this digital age this pic is perfectly exposed

! Indeed the highlights are not overexposed to the point of being lost, and the darker part of the image is not so dark that detail is lost or hard to recover

However your eyes probably did not see as much contrast in the real scene as the pic suggests: the man is to dark. Well, all you need to do is to use Photoshop to adjust luminosity to where it should be.

There are many techniques to do that. Here is a more elaborate one, discussed by Dan Margulis:
http://ep.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=Articles&Subsection=Display&ARTICLE_ID=212330

Thierry

Help with long exposures and water

Comments