Silky Water

[smcilree]

Is there anyone else here who feels they're going to lose their lunch the next time someone proudly shows off a picture of moving water shot with a slooooow shutter? Waterfalls, and mountain streams and incoming waves and fountains aren't smooth and silky. They are made up of splashes and drops and streams and spray. The blurred water thing was kind of nice the first hundred or so times I saw it, but to me it's become cliché.

[Krusty79]

I've seen so many of those shots now on DPS, I've lost my desire to take one. The novelty has definitely worn off.

[KimberlyH]

I'm sure it's all just personal preference...like Orton effect, selective coloring, HDR, sun flare, camera tilt and any number of other PP effects and such. I know someone who LOVES selective coloring and thinks it's the greatest thing ever invented. I just roll my eyes and go on. However, the silky water is still something I think is pretty.

[Indigo November]

I think that it has it's uses, just like everything else.
When the bottom of a creek is distracting, for example. Or when reflections are distracting.

[SwissJon]

I think you're getting old and grouchy.. I don't see the problem with taking a good photo of water that looks silky. It's a lot more difficult than shooting at 1/200s.. Obviously there's a taste issue here, and there's room for every style, nobody's forcing you to look.

"Lose my lunch", for goodnes sake.. Don't be silly..

[katia]

the only thing i'm sick of is every 2nd picture being an over-done HDR. i've never done HDR and probably won't ever.

[dakwegmo]

Originally Posted by smcilree

Waterfalls, and mountain streams and incoming waves and fountains aren't smooth and silky. They are made up of splashes and drops and streams and spray.

Yep, but when you photograph moving water you have to make a choice about what to do with those splashes, drops, and spray. You can make the water silky smooth, effectively conveying a sense of movement, or you can freeze the water in place. Neither choice is a 100% accurate depiction of what the waterfall would look like if you were to stand there, because we don't see water frozen in place. Neither of those approaches will accurately depict what you see when you're standing there, so you have to decide what it is you're trying to say about the water. For me, I use the silky water effect to convey a feeling of peacefulness, tranquility, etc. that I feel when I'm standing next to the water. Occaisionally, though, I'll stand in awe of the raw power of the water, and in those cases freezing the water conveys that better.

[dakwegmo]

Originally Posted by SwissJon

I think you're getting old and grouchy.. I don't see the problem with taking a good photo of water that looks silky. It's a lot more difficult than shooting at 1/200s.. Obviously there's a taste issue here, and there's room for every style, nobody's forcing you to look.

"Lose my lunch", for goodnes sake.. Don't be silly..

Right on!

It's definitely a matter of taste. If you don't like it, don't look. Or say so and move on.

[Mike367]

I disagree. I used both slow shutter speed and HDR in this shot, and will do it again.



E.T.A. Sorry if I made you hurl.

[Gulf Coast Girl]

To be honest the only thing that makes me want to lose my lunch is reading posts where people go on about something being overdone or cliche. Not pointing anyone out specifically ..... but I've seen this a lot with comments about selective color photos. It just comes off to me as arrogant and snobby.

Everyone has their own taste in what appeals to them so who is anyone to determine that a particular style of photography is cliche for everyone else?

Not trying to pick a fight here.... just my 2 cents on the issue at hand