first long exposure - waterfall

[payn817]

Just trying to get the effect right, the compposition is off, and it isn't a great location. It is just practice for later. Does the water blur effect work in this shot?

f 6.7
1/3 sec
21mm

[mjs1973]

I think you did a very nice job with the blur in this shot. Keep it up!

[Outdoorsman]

You know, when I'm going for a blurred water effect I won't shoot at a faster shutter speed than 1/4. And even then it's pushing it. I prefer to use at least one second, and the norm for me is 2-4 seconds. This means small apertures and dim shooting conditions.
This shot looks overexposed to me, which is always a danger with moving water. The white areas tend to blow out with brighter exposures. Wait for early morning on an overcast day, shoot ISO100 or lower, small aperture, shutter 1-4 seconds, and bracket to a stop or so. All my best waterfall images use this combination. Take it from me, I'm a waterfall junkie. Have fun!
-O-

[payn817]

You know, when I'm going for a blurred water effect I won't shoot at a faster shutter speed than 1/4. And even then it's pushing it. I prefer to use at least one second, and the norm for me is 2-4 seconds. This means small apertures and dim shooting conditions.
This shot looks overexposed to me, which is always a danger with moving water. The white areas tend to blow out with brighter exposures. Wait for early morning on an overcast day, shoot ISO100 or lower, small aperture, shutter 1-4 seconds, and bracket to a stop or so. All my best waterfall images use this combination. Take it from me, I'm a waterfall junkie. Have fun!
-O-

This was actually overcast, and early morning, lol. I used -2.? on exposure. So, I should use maybe a F8 (smallest aperture I have) and -4 exposure @ 1 sec? I did another one at one sec with no compensation and at f6.7, and the WHOL:E photo was white, lol.

[payn817]

Thanks MJ. I was happy considering this was my first attempt, and didn't have a tripod with me.

[CB Photo]

Hey not bad without a tripod. I do like how the rock wall on the left frames the shot and forces the viewer to look at the water fall.

[payn817]

Thanks Chris. I couldn't get the whole thing because a friend was sitting on the side, and refused to move! Shoulda slapped him.

[Outdoorsman]

This was actually overcast, and early morning, lol. I used -2.? on exposure. So, I should use maybe a F8 (smallest aperture I have) and -4 exposure @ 1 sec? I did another one at one sec with no compensation and at f6.7, and the WHOL:E photo was white, lol.

Aaaah. I see. I assumed you were using an SLR. With an SLR you would be able to use a smaller aperture, which will in turn give you the slower shutter you need. This was a hard reality I had to face when I first tried doing a waterfall with a P&S digi. The aperture was also limited to f/8, and so it meant that waterfalls were no longer as doable as I was used to.
Unfortunately, underexposing would give you a faster shutter at f/8, which is the opposite of what you want. Overexposing will give you a slower shutter, but it will also cause the "white out" you mentioned.
So the solution would be to wait for the light to get low enough to get that slow shutter without overexposing. Or you could use an ND filter. A polarizer would also cut down on light, so that's an option. If you can get either one for your camera, that is...
Good luck!
-O-

[moonspell]

i like it, great first waterfall pic, keep it up

[Knight]

Payn this may help you in your quest for magical water hehe.

http://www.outbackphoto.com/DigitalC...001/essay.html

Scroll down on this page it may give you a good way to acheive what your trying to do here , hope it helps

PS i offer no critique to this one reason being that i have never attempted such a photo

[payn817]

Thanks moonspell.

Knight! Me, cheat?? Never! No, seriously, I think that was a nice effect he produced there, and a new take on an old idea perhaps. What i was trying to do was have that traditional blur in the movement of the water. I did acheive the effect to some extent, and it seems a matter of personal taste as to how well it was acheived.

There seems to be alot of discussion on the ability of a "p&s" vs a DSLR. The Kodak system I use is actually more reffered to as a pro-sumer. I need to justify spending $1000+ for a dslr before getting one. So, I am trying "traditional" techniques to see if I can produce results. If I can, and if my style requires it, then I will spend the money. However, first, I must understand things like aperture, focal lengths, and shutter speed (not to mention find my niche).