Daytime long exposure

I am starting with daylight long exposures. It was quite foggy today, but I am somewhat happy with the result. I need to keep practicing to get sharp photographs. Maybe I am stacking too many filters (I have a good 10 stop B+W and a cheap-o variable one 1-9 stops) I think my limiting factor is the variable one. Will try to get to the same spot later on during the day to try with the 10 stop one only. What do you guys think?

Being able to see the settings would be nice, at least it would make critique easier in that we would know what you had done.

Alan

iso 100, f18, 280 sec exposure on 10 stop filter + 3 more stops on variable filter

First thing I'd do is stop using the variable filter; most of those are really not great and even the expensive ones have some significant issues at wide angles. When it's foggy like that, you're going to get a somewhat washed out look as in that shot; but you can add Contrast in post processing to help that to some degree. I would also suggest dialing the color temp back a little bit as this one appears a bit yellow-ish across the frame.

Also, pre-focus before putting the 10-stop in place. That should help with your clarity/sharpness. Do your focus through Live View and magnify to 10x before focusing.

so the only reason to use the long exposure was to calm the water? i feel like you could've gotten away with a flat water with a much shorter exposure...if there was cloud movement, or some other movement to show maybe you'd need to go 280seconds...but for just the water i wonder if just 30 seconds would've been enough

DreDaze wrote in post #18031523
so the only reason to use the long exposure was to calm the water? i feel like you could've gotten away with a flat water with a much shorter exposure...if there was cloud movement, or some other movement to show maybe you'd need to go 280seconds...but for just the water i wonder if just 30 seconds would've been enough

+1, not sure why you went with such a long exposure.

Seems very flat - lacking depth and needs a contrast boost. The horizon where the sky meets the water has disappeared.

Interesting subject though!

Cheers,

Jeff

First thing to pop into my head was "reminds me of Ireland". Then I looked at your location.

Having only visited Ireland once, I would say the low contrast is completely appropriate. I remember seeing this type of scene almost every day during my trip.

f/18 is costing you sharpness, too

the image is overexposed, i think, and white balance is off.

i'd be glad to post an edit, just let me know if that's okay.

Curious as to the expect result of a long exposure of static objects. Also, with an almost 5 minute exposure any foliage, grass, etc wont be sharp, and also increases the possibility of the least little camera/tripod vibration.

Maybe the experts here know, does reciprocal failure happen with sensors as is does with film in long exposures.

Thanks for all the comments. Next time I'm in that spot I'll try a shorter exposure and I'll remove the second filter. I wanted the water to merge with the cloudy sky, but probably, a much shorter exposure would have sufficed.

If you want the extreme DOF, use a lower f/stop and photostack the image...
I like the blending of water/sky though.

chauncey wrote in post #18055379
If you want the extreme DOF, use a lower f/stop and photostack the image...
I like the blending of water/sky though.

cubatahavana wrote in post #18031145
iso 100, f18, 280 sec exposure on 10 stop filter + 3 more stops on variable filter

Bassat wrote in post #18042731
f/18 is costing you sharpness, too

My suggestion would also be to open the aperture a bit more. That's why you use the 10 stop filters so you can open that aperture up more. And I'd agree with getting rid of the variable stop filter. I have never owned one but I hear they are terrible. You have a great one from B+W. Use it and learn from it.

chauncey wrote in post #18055379
If you want the extreme DOF, use a lower f/stop and photostack the image...
I like the blending of water/sky though.

I don't think there is any sky in this photo. From the angle it looks like it is all water and no sky.

CameraMan wrote in post #18055771
I don't think there is any sky in this photo. From the angle it looks like it is all water and no sky.

the water is on the top fourth of the image more or less