Soft Water

[Cold]

A few weeks ago, I wanted to go out and continue putting my new (to me) SLR through its paces, unfortunately, 'real life' got in the way, and by the time I arrived at the area I wanted to shoot, it was all but dark in the valley.

Trying to make the best of the situation, I decided to have a go at some long exposure shots, and, overall, while it was tough getting them, the few that did turn out pleased me greatly. Here's one of the better ones for your critical eyes. (Hopefully this works!)

From

Model: NIKON D80
ISO: 200
Exposure: 25.0 sec
Aperture: 25.0
Focal Length: 21mm
Flash Used: No

Handheld, braced.

I guess what I'm primarily looking for are pointers as to what I did right as well as wrong. Things like general composition, and even post-processing. Overall, I think it's kind of dark, but bumping the EV, opening up the aperture, or extending the shutter led to blowing out the water itself, and since it is the main subject, I decided to concentrate on getting that right, and worried less about the mountain laurel on the opposite bank.

[navcom]

Hi!

Since you are new to long exposures, we won't yell at you too much. LOL!!!...just kidding, no yelling.

You've done pretty well with smoothing out the water. Only a couple things I would add to help you in the future.

First, definitely get a tripod...and use it always...day or night...for all landscape photos. Hand holding is really not a good option, even if it's braced. A tripod will guarantee sharpness while with hand holding, even braced well, can lead to slight vibrations which will ruin your image quality. You may not notice it till you get home and call it up on the screen.

Second, I would try avoid using such a small aperture opening (f/25). Almost all lenses show some diffraction at that size and that is another contributing factor to soft or slightly blurry images.

Since you mentioned this was your first real adventure in long exposures, I'm going to assume you set the aperture so small as a means to get a real slow shutter speed. I would recommend using a neutral density filter for slowing down the shutter.

Aperture determines depth of field in landscape photography (that's its primary function) and it's a very important function...one that most landscape photographers consider the most important setting on the camera. Using it for shutter control at this magnitude is kind of like buying a helicopter instead of a snow blower to blow snow. The helicopter will certainly blow loose snow around but it won't do it very efficiently and that's not what it was designed for. Same with your lens aperture.

Use your aperture to set your depth of field and use an ND filter to control shutter speed if you need it slow. This will allow you to freely use the aperture setting to whatever you need to get the DOF you require for the shot.

Of course if you don't have an ND filter, you do what you have to do. But I would recommend getting a set if you can. Along with a polarizer, they are invaluable to the landscape photographer.

Otherwise good job! Nice first try!

Hope that helps!

[LenDog]

Originally Posted by navcom

Hi!

Since you are new to long exposures, we won't yell at you too much. LOL!!!...just kidding, no yelling.

You've done pretty well with smoothing out the water. Only a couple things I would add to help you in the future.

First, definitely get a tripod...and use it always...day or night...for all landscape photos. Hand holding is really not a good option, even if it's braced. A tripod will guarantee sharpness while with hand holding, even braced well, can lead to slight vibrations which will ruin your image quality. You may not notice it till you get home and call it up on the screen.

This is 25 seconds?? The post indicates hand-held, but the EXIF indicates 25 sec exposure. NO ONE can hand hold a 25 second exposure.

If you want a realistic critique, post reality.

[Cold]

Originally Posted by LenDog

This is 25 seconds?? The post indicates hand-held, but the EXIF indicates 25 sec exposure. NO ONE can hand hold a 25 second exposure.

If you want a realistic critique, post reality.

Why would I lie? I laid belly-down on some rocks, arms flat against the rocks, had my right hand in the normal position, and my left hand, palm-down, directly under the camera, on the rocks to get a level shot (just resting the camera on the rocks was pointing it down into the rocks you see in the foreground). It wasn't a freehand shot, which is why I specified handheld (as opposed to tripod, monopod, bean bag, etc.) and braced (not freehand, not one-handed, not untouched but resting on a fence, etc). If you choose not to believe me, fine, that's your call, but don't tell me I'm a liar.

navcom, thanks for the great critique! I still don't have a tripod yet, but it's on the list, as is a CP filter. An ND filter set wasn't on the horizon, but it may have to be. I will have to look up diffraction, as I haven't heard or read about this yet, and simply thought that a smaller aperture would just extend my DoF while keeping light out. How small of an aperture is safe before diffraction starts to become a problem?

[navcom]

Diffraction is ultimately lens-specific...and not just a lens model line...each individual lens. The only way to know where it starts is to run your own tests on each lens. Just take the same picture at different apertures and compare.

Diffraction is the softening of an image due to the smaller opening of the lens. The little blades that move in and out to form the aperture opening are the culprit. Whenever light hits the edges of the blades, it gets scattered a bit. When the aperture is wide, most of the light entering the lens doesn't hit the blades, but the smaller the opening gets, the more of the light hits the blade edges and thus gets scattered, causing a bit of softening and "fuzziness".

Most lenses have their sharpest range from about a stop or two above wide open (say, f/5.6 or so) through about f/13 or f/16. So, if you want good DOF, most landscapes are best in around the f/11 to f/16 range or so. That doesn't mean you never use the smaller apertures (they are designed for a reason). Sometimes you really need super deep DOF and are willing to put up with some diffraction for the DOF in return.

[abhivg]

You've definitely achieved the soft effect. Would like to see more of the white water as a dominant part of the picture.