Nick Zentena wrote in
:

Al Denelsbeck wrote:


I could very well be responsible for giving people epilepsy if
I
tried that, since what I'm trying to capture is bioluminescence in
the nearby sound/lagoon. The effect is so faint, about like
moonlight, that only a long time exposure is going to catch it, and
only by sustaining the turbulence that creates it.


Then don't you want a film with good reciprocity [who knows how
it's
spelled] more then a fast film?


Actually, I couldn't care less if they know how to spell it... ;-)

But basically, no. The last experiment I did involved several long
exposures, the longest being three minutes. During that time, I maintained
the turbulence by hand - my own. By the barest fraction, I registered
enough light on the film (Superia 400, what I had loaded at the time) to
find a frame edge. That's not enough.

So for the sake of my arm, I'm trying to avoid stirring up the water
fiercely for 12 or 24 or more minutes.

I should note, before someone suggests it, that this is an open water
phenomenon. Bringing samples back to produce the effect within a tank have
failed, and the effect wasn't even visible within 100' of shore last night
(thankfully the water remains shallow for a long ways). So lots of
"assistance" options are out of the question, and no, I don't own a boat.

Once I even know I can capture the effect, uh, effectively, then I
can work on setting up the circumstances to get a photo that isn't boring
as hell.

Capturing what I've seen, such as expanding ripples from a rock
tossed in, or the outlines of dolphins chasing meals, seems totally
impossible. Really a shame, but whatcha gonna do?


- Al.

--
To reply, insert dash in address to match domain below
Online photo gallery at www.wading-in.net