Shooting Waterfalls With Slowm Shutter During Day

[Ishyid]

Ok so I'm interested in shooting waterfalls and what not during the day with a slow shutter speed. I'm pretty sure a ND filter will do the trick, but I don't know what stop to get one in. for those of you who have expirence with shooting waterfalls suring daylight with a slower shutter speed and a ND filter PLEASE let me know your personal opinion!!!

[RecurrentNerve]

Well, it can definitely be done. I've actually done it with a polarising filter rather than an ND.



This was taken with the following settings:

3"
f/36
ISO 100
55mm focal length
Circular polariser

A polariser is useful for lots of things - removing reflections from surfaces, deepening skies, filtering out haze - whereas an ND filter is a bit more limited.

[OsmosisStudios]

Here's my workflow: Find your location.

GO to said location at the time of day at which you want to take a picture, during the conditions you're looking for. Take a reading.

Figure out from there what aperture you want to use (I wouldnt go beyond f/11 for a cropped sensor camera).

Figure out what shutter speed you need for that. Then figure out how many stops off that is from the current reading.

TA-DAA

[dcclark]

If at all possible, go on a overcast (uniformly cloudy) day. The nice diffused lighting can help a lot. Shadows can be interesting, but with very long exposures they can also cause a lot of trouble.

Definitely get a very strong ND. 8x (3 stop) is really the minimum.

[dakwegmo]

In order to get the smooth water look in a waterfall, you need a shutter speed of about ¼ second, or longer. On a sunny day in an area that's completely open, you'll need to remove 5 or more stops of light. A circular polarizer will get you about 2 stops, and is great for shooting waterfalls anyway. Stacking a 3 stop ND filter on top can get you to the 5 stops you're after. However, even with filters, you're shots will be much better if you can shoot in the early morning or late evening. Direct overhead light is just as unflattering to landscapes as it is to people.

[J. r. Weems]

Originally Posted by RecurrentNerve

Well, it can definitely be done. I've actually done it with a polarising filter rather than an ND.



This was taken with the following settings:

3"
f/36
ISO 100
55mm focal length
Circular polariser

A polariser is useful for lots of things - removing reflections from surfaces, deepening skies, filtering out haze - whereas an ND filter is a bit more limited.

All above is true of course, but the photo is OUTSTANDING!!!

[RecurrentNerve]

Well, thank you for the capitalised praise! I like the effect with the water but I'm not too happy with the general composition, I was way up on a viewpoint overlooking the falls and my lowly 18-55mm kit lens couldn't get me any closer. It would have been great to get down at water level.

[Darkninja462]

I know this properly won't help, but it really depends on how "blurry" you want the water to be, I find that my ND2, gives me enough blur to make it still have some action, but if you want the "misty" effect that you can get a ND8 would be needed, and the ND4 some ware in between the two. I think your best bet would be to try and find a ND filter kit usually include ND2, ND4 and ND8 that way you will have them all

Hope that helped in some way,

Ninja

[Andrew Briggs]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

(I wouldnt go beyond f/11 for a cropped sensor camera).

Why's that Osmosis?

[kirbinster]

I use a B+W 10 stop (yes 10 stop not #10) neutral density filter and it works quite well. Here are two random water shots with it:


Camera Nikon D90
Exposure 10
Aperture f/9.0
Focal Length 14 mm
ISO Speed 100



Camera Nikon D5000
Exposure 6
Aperture f/11.0
Focal Length 14 mm
ISO Speed 200