Local Stream C&C Requested

Took these two shots on a local hike. Let me know what you think

ISO 50, F/22, 4"

The mist effect is nice, but I suggest you take such photos after the rain or in the early morning when the rocks are wet. It makes for a better shot. I even know people who use buckets to wet the rocks before shooting.

rssfhs wrote in post #2199179
The mist effect is nice, but I suggest you take such photos after the rain or in the early morning when the rocks are wet. It makes for a better shot. I even know people who use buckets to wet the rocks before shooting.

Very interesing idea, being that it rains once every six months here , the bucket trick sounds good. Only problem is hiking with a bucket

calicokat wrote in post #2199193
Very interesing idea, being that it rains once every six months here , the bucket trick sounds good. Only problem is hiking with a bucket

If it's warm enough, you could go for a swim and splash water around before taking your shots. Otherwise, you could use Sierra cups instead; more work than buckets, but still possible, especially for close-ups.

rssfhs wrote in post #2199214
If it's warm enough, you could go for a swim and splash water around before taking your shots. Otherwise, you could use Sierra cups instead; more work than buckets, but still possible, especially for close-ups.

I will give it a try

Over PP'ed and shot with IS USM L lens nonsense! Go back and shoot it with a pinhole camera and stay out there for 4 days! True photos are made by those who suffer for their art!

Just kidding.....

Nice photos and some very good points from Craig about 'creating' the photo. We're not PJ's so we have a little bit more flexibility..

Try a plastic bag to carry the water....let the stream fill the bag. You mean you don't carry a garbage bag to protect your gear?

ND filter may help; I generally try to avoid going to ISO 50 (on FF) or ISO 100 (1D classic) because you sacrifice dynamic range. The highlights are a little blown, you could burn 'em a little to bring back the detail if it is not already lost. Get a 8X ND, that'll enable you to use ISO 100, f/11.

Lightstream wrote in post #2199336
Over PP'ed and shot with IS USM L lens nonsense! Go back and shoot it with a pinhole camera and stay out there for 4 days! True photos are made by those who suffer for their art!

Just kidding.....

Nice photos and some very good points from Craig about 'creating' the photo. We're not PJ's so we have a little bit more flexibility..

Try a plastic bag to carry the water....let the stream fill the bag. You mean you don't carry a garbage bag to protect your gear?

ND filter may help; I generally try to avoid going to ISO 50 (on FF) or ISO 100 (1D classic) because you sacrifice dynamic range. The highlights are a little blown, you could burn 'em a little to bring back the detail if it is not already lost. Get a 8X ND, that'll enable you to use ISO 100, f/11.

Thank you for the comments and suggestions

I would suggest, as I do it myself, exposing for the bright spots and pulling back the shadow detail in PS (always check the histogram when shooting). Plus if there are such extremities of range then use ISO 100 - yes it is faster but you blow less pictures.

Neilyb wrote in post #2199785
I would suggest, as I do it myself, exposing for the bright spots and pulling back the shadow detail in PS (always check the histogram when shooting). Plus if there are such extremities of range then use ISO 100 - yes it is faster but you blow less pictures.

Thanks for the suggestion

No worries, it will make a great difference.

Neilyb wrote in post #2200730
No worries, it will make a great difference.

Well, on this particular shot, I did alot of test shots, when exposing for the white wash part of the water, I got vastly under-exposed shots, the water looked similar, but the rest of the photo suffered. I like these two, they show a compromise in the scene, everything is exposed properly, my histogram was pretty centered, one straight up line off to the right due to the white water, but I am ok with it. Besides, what is water supposed to look like at 4" or 1/4" for that matter, I could go with 1/15th or 1/30th, but the flowing effect is gone and you have a boring photo. So, I ask, if you want the flowing effect that a long exposure gives, how would the water ever look any different

Sorry, commented on the wrong thread. Have PM'd you.

rssfhs wrote in post #2199214
If it's warm enough, you could go for a swim and splash water around before taking your shots. Otherwise, you could use Sierra cups instead; more work than buckets, but still possible, especially for close-ups.

I'll admit to doing that in my picture of my pond! (http://www.photography​-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=233744) Just gives the rocks a bit of shine

I like the pictures calicokat, especially the first one. Like the way you can see the falls higher up the stream, and they lead your eye down the frame.

red hot sheep wrote in post #2200935
I'll admit to doing that in my picture of my pond! (http://www.photography​-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=233744) Just gives the rocks a bit of shine

I like the pictures calicokat, especially the first one. Like the way you can see the falls higher up the stream, and they lead your eye down the frame.

Thank you for the comments, much appreciated

I'm no expert but I do know that you can get begin to capture water "movement" at around 1/15 sec. 4" just seems really long. A shorter exposer might help you get the exposure you looking for. I might think that wetting the rocks as others suggested might balace the exposure as well - dunno though.