A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

River shots - yes, with blurred water time exposure.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 12th 12, 03:13 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default River shots - yes, with blurred water time exposure.

As chance had it we went for a walk up a small river yesterday
afternoon. Not much to photograph and I didn't have an ND with me. I
did have my polarizer. So set the ISO as low as possible (100) and
slapped on the pol (which given the overcast allowed control of the
clouds reflecting in the water that an ND would not provide).

The first two:
http://tinyurl.com/8k3fn6u
http://tinyurl.com/8nqutyk

To me the second is more appealing. Not something I'd print however.

Then there was this -

http://tinyurl.com/9fqu3nv

But there was no good vantage point to capture the "S" bend well.

But other things that can be done with water is to look for currents
bearing blobs of foam and making streak patterns. This river wasn't
ideal (too much foam everywhere), but there were a couple nice pools.

http://tinyurl.com/9lpdylf

http://tinyurl.com/94za2eg

http://tinyurl.com/97e82lc

http://tinyurl.com/8bpco2n

http://tinyurl.com/9hoswyq

Too much happening to make those really nice, but you get an idea for
the effect. And the polarizer was essential to get rid of the clouds
reflecting in the water.

But in the end I can't help but feel that photographing moving water can
benefit from 'frozen', to slight movement to veils. In the end it's
impact of the image that count, not "what" or "how" it is done and not
whether some people deem it over done or too cliché.

Also had the most painful ever bite from a horsefly. Pain didn't
subside until this morning.

--
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
-Samuel Clemens.

  #2  
Old August 12th 12, 08:27 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default River shots - yes, with blurred water time exposure.

On 2012-08-12 15:15 , RichA wrote:
On Aug 12, 10:13 am, Alan Browne
wrote:

But in the end I can't help but feel that photographing moving water can
benefit from 'frozen', to slight movement to veils. In the end it's
impact of the image that count, not "what" or "how" it is done and not
whether some people deem it over done or too cliché.


Demon: "Hmmm, intriguing...no, wait; BORING! Tear off his
kneecaps!!"


C'mon Rich - post a photograph instead. Blaze the trail for us.


--
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
-Samuel Clemens.

  #3  
Old August 12th 12, 10:15 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Dudley Hanks[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,282
Default River shots - yes, with blurred water time exposure.


"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Aug 12, 10:13 am, Alan Browne
wrote:

But in the end I can't help but feel that photographing moving water can
benefit from 'frozen', to slight movement to veils. In the end it's
impact of the image that count, not "what" or "how" it is done and not
whether some people deem it over done or too cliché.


Demon: "Hmmm, intriguing...no, wait; BORING! Tear off his
kneecaps!!"

-Buffy the Vampire Slayer


If blurred water is too cliché, what about all those close-ups with blurred
backgrounds? If you want to make an argument for overdone, that would be
easier.

Or, then there's the portrait with the hint of a shadow extending up, but
not touching, the eye. Millions shot every year.

Or, there's the ever-popular landscape with subject highlighted by shaft of
light. Ask any landscape photographer worth his or her salt if their
portfolio would be complete without such a shot, and I'm pretty confident I
know what they'll say.

The reason these "clichéic" shots are so prevalent is that they sell. So,
like it or not, if you view the work of others, lighten up a bit and try to
enjoy what you see.

Take Care,
Dudley


  #4  
Old August 12th 12, 10:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default River shots - yes, with blurred water time exposure.

On 8/12/2012 5:15 PM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Aug 12, 10:13 am, Alan Browne
wrote:

But in the end I can't help but feel that photographing moving water can
benefit from 'frozen', to slight movement to veils. In the end it's
impact of the image that count, not "what" or "how" it is done and not
whether some people deem it over done or too cliché.


Demon: "Hmmm, intriguing...no, wait; BORING! Tear off his
kneecaps!!"

-Buffy the Vampire Slayer


If blurred water is too cliché, what about all those close-ups with blurred
backgrounds? If you want to make an argument for overdone, that would be
easier.

Or, then there's the portrait with the hint of a shadow extending up, but
not touching, the eye. Millions shot every year.

Or, there's the ever-popular landscape with subject highlighted by shaft of
light. Ask any landscape photographer worth his or her salt if their
portfolio would be complete without such a shot, and I'm pretty confident I
know what they'll say.

The reason these "clichéic" shots are so prevalent is that they sell. So,
like it or not, if you view the work of others, lighten up a bit and try to
enjoy what you see.

Take Care,
Dudley




Music by Beethoven and Tchaikovsky can also be cliche, but millions of
people listen and enjoy it every year.
I guess some here are abot that.


--

PeterN
  #5  
Old August 13th 12, 01:33 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 210
Default River shots - yes, with blurred water time exposure.

On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 10:13:34 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

As chance had it we went for a walk up a small river yesterday
afternoon. Not much to photograph and I didn't have an ND with me. I
did have my polarizer. So set the ISO as low as possible (100) and
slapped on the pol (which given the overcast allowed control of the
clouds reflecting in the water that an ND would not provide).

The first two:
http://tinyurl.com/8k3fn6u
http://tinyurl.com/8nqutyk

To me the second is more appealing. Not something I'd print however.

Then there was this -

http://tinyurl.com/9fqu3nv

But there was no good vantage point to capture the "S" bend well.

But other things that can be done with water is to look for currents
bearing blobs of foam and making streak patterns. This river wasn't
ideal (too much foam everywhere), but there were a couple nice pools.

http://tinyurl.com/9lpdylf

http://tinyurl.com/94za2eg

http://tinyurl.com/97e82lc

http://tinyurl.com/8bpco2n

http://tinyurl.com/9hoswyq

Too much happening to make those really nice, but you get an idea for
the effect. And the polarizer was essential to get rid of the clouds
reflecting in the water.

But in the end I can't help but feel that photographing moving water can
benefit from 'frozen', to slight movement to veils. In the end it's
impact of the image that count, not "what" or "how" it is done and not
whether some people deem it over done or too cliché.

Also had the most painful ever bite from a horsefly. Pain didn't
subside until this morning.


I think moving water should be blurred to some extent, lets you know it's
moving...

I found your foam pictures kind of dizzying!

  #6  
Old August 13th 12, 01:36 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default River shots - yes, with blurred water time exposure.

On 2012-08-12 20:33 , wrote:
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 10:13:34 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

As chance had it we went for a walk up a small river yesterday
afternoon. Not much to photograph and I didn't have an ND with me. I
did have my polarizer. So set the ISO as low as possible (100) and
slapped on the pol (which given the overcast allowed control of the
clouds reflecting in the water that an ND would not provide).

The first two:
http://tinyurl.com/8k3fn6u
http://tinyurl.com/8nqutyk

To me the second is more appealing. Not something I'd print however.

Then there was this -

http://tinyurl.com/9fqu3nv

But there was no good vantage point to capture the "S" bend well.

But other things that can be done with water is to look for currents
bearing blobs of foam and making streak patterns. This river wasn't
ideal (too much foam everywhere), but there were a couple nice pools.

http://tinyurl.com/9lpdylf

http://tinyurl.com/94za2eg

http://tinyurl.com/97e82lc

http://tinyurl.com/8bpco2n

http://tinyurl.com/9hoswyq

Too much happening to make those really nice, but you get an idea for
the effect. And the polarizer was essential to get rid of the clouds
reflecting in the water.

But in the end I can't help but feel that photographing moving water can
benefit from 'frozen', to slight movement to veils. In the end it's
impact of the image that count, not "what" or "how" it is done and not
whether some people deem it over done or too cliché.

Also had the most painful ever bite from a horsefly. Pain didn't
subside until this morning.


I think moving water should be blurred to some extent, lets you know it's
moving...

I found your foam pictures kind of dizzying!


They are a bit odd aren't they? Like they're vibrating.

Not what I was looking for. I wanted just a few blobs. But that river
was quite fast (in most places) and was making a lot of foam.

--
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
-Samuel Clemens.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.