ND "silky water" shots

[GoneTomorrow]

I've been trying my hand at shooting moving water with an ND filter during the day to get that silky effect. I know it's trite and nothing new, but what does everyone think of these? Also, if anyone has some good ones of their own, please post! ;)

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y115/GoneTomorrow/HDR.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y115/GoneTomorrow/HDR_2.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y115/GoneTomorrow/HDR_3.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y115/GoneTomorrow/HDR_4.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y115/GoneTomorrow/HDR_5.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y115/GoneTomorrow/HDR_6.jpg

[01514]

pretty nice :)
here couple of mine taken in a london park without a tripod

[Abnel]

not bad fot shoot without tripod

[24Peter]

not bad fot shoot without tripod

Abnel - "trying his hand" isn't the same as shooting handheld. I suspect he used a tripod for these.

GoneT - what SS were you using? I haven't done any of these but there seems to be a magic # to get the right effect. Too long and it looks too soft. Too short and, well, there's no effect.

[TheWengler]

Abnel - "trying his hand" isn't the same as shooting handheld. I suspect he used a tripod for these.

Peter, the 2nd poster is the one shooting w/o a tripod.

[Visual Reality]

Not bad, but I'm seeing a lot of motion blur in the leaves.

[01514]

Peter, the 2nd poster is the one shooting w/o a tripod.

yes mine was shot handheld I've try with longer shutter but there was too much blur even with IS on

[adam75south]

according to the Popular Photography magazines nick sent me(shootout)...1/2 to 1 sec is usually a good SS for this stuff. :)

some of them are a little too frothy for my taste, but definitely good lookin pics.

[michaelb]

Not bad.

I haven't done many of these; I never seem to have my tripod with me when I come accross a waterfall - need to get a lighter tripod. ;)

Here's one I just happened to take yesterday though. Spotted this waterfall on a kayaking trip where my wife and I stopped to have lunch. Not a great shot, but here it is.



24-105, CP filter, 47mm, 0.5 sec, hand-held....
http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/photos/297437724_LhQWQ-L.jpg

[adam75south]

...on a kayaking trip where my wife and I stopped to have lunch...
:( yea, well you missed out on the flavor of love marathon while you were out there. hate to be you.

[GoneTomorrow]

Abnel - "trying his hand" isn't the same as shooting handheld. I suspect he used a tripod for these.

GoneT - what SS were you using? I haven't done any of these but there seems to be a magic # to get the right effect. Too long and it looks too soft. Too short and, well, there's no effect.

You are so right! I think between 2 and 5 seconds worked best for me. All the images I posted have EXIF, see for your self.

When I first did these, I tried going for the longest possible shutter speeds, with two ND filters and a polarizer stacked to achieve 30" but they were to mottled and noisy.

[GoneTomorrow]

pretty nice :)
here couple of mine taken in a london park without a tripod

About what I would expect for 1/5" shutter speed. That's nice looking waterfall, you should take your tripod and get some longer times.

[GoneTomorrow]

Not bad, but I'm seeing a lot of motion blur in the leaves.

Yes, it was unfortunately a rather windy day. Keep in mind too that the shutter speeds were as long as 5 seconds, so there was little I could do to avoid it.

[GoneTomorrow]

according to the Popular Photography magazines nick sent me(shootout)...1/2 to 1 sec is usually a good SS for this stuff. :)

some of them are a little too frothy for my taste, but definitely good lookin pics.

I guess it's a matter of taste. I prefer the long frothy and wispy water. ;) One or two of those are between 1 and 2 seconds I think.

[01514]

About what I would expect for 1/5" shutter speed. That's nice looking waterfall, you should take your tripod and get some longer times.

well I should but I took those on a week trip to London :) but next time I'll be shooting closer to home in canada I'll take my tripod :)

[TheWengler]

I'm all for the milky water shots but I don't think it worked out in these. You're losing detail in the highlights in some of these. I think for this to work you need more even lighting. It also doesn't look good when the trees are blurry too as they represent a significant portion of the image.

[GoneTomorrow]

I'm all for the milky water shots but I don't think it worked out in these. You're losing detail in the highlights it some of these. I think for this to work you need more even lighting. It also doesn't look good when the trees are blurry too as they represent a significant portion of the image.

You're right, actually these are all my first attempts at HDR shots using layers and layer masks, so some of them turned out odd.

[michaelb]

:( yea, well you missed out on the flavor of love marathon while you were out there. hate to be you.

You lost me on that one Adam.

[FLiPMaRC]

:( yea, well you missed out on the flavor of love marathon while you were out there. hate to be you.

You really love that show, LOL! :D FLAVA FLAV!!! :p

[cyberpac9]

@GoneTomorrow - where were your shots taken, around lex?

[GoneTomorrow]

@GoneTomorrow - where were your shots taken, around lex?

Raven Run, at Evan's Mill Pond Dam ;)

[cyberpac9]

those are better shots than i've been able to get at raven run...btw, did you see they are adding 256 acres, which will be open in 2010....can't wait...

[GoneTomorrow]

those are better shots than i've been able to get at raven run...btw, did you see they are adding 256 acres, which will be open in 2010....can't wait...

:eek: I didn't know that! Wish it wouldn't take so long, but then again I have plenty of Raven Run left yet to explore.

And for those shots, I boldly had to go beyond the "PARK BORDER: DO NOT CROSS: POSTED" sign. :rolleyes: Plus for some of them I was standing in two feet of water with my tripod. Anything for the shot!

[GaryS]

No ND filter... Just stopped down using iso100 and a CPL.
In the Way
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3077/2510675864_0c176f5da3_o.jpg

Rushing
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3034/2510550078_ece8e6614f_o.jpg

I really need to pick up a ND filter that fits my Sigma.... I was lucky it was cloudy or I never would have gotten slow enough shutters.

[GoneTomorrow]

No ND filter... Just stopped down using iso100 and a CPL.
In the Way


Rushing


I really need to pick up a ND filter that fits my Sigma.... I was lucky it was cloudy or I never would have gotten slow enough shutters.

I was just thinking that it must have been overcast, but it's about what I would expect for 1/2" SS. Nice shots though!

Did you check out B&H? They have filters for nearly every size. I shot mine with a .9 (6X) ND filter and it was very sunny that day (and a polarizer stacked on it), so I had the aperture small as it would go to get 2" to 5" SS (f/22 - f/29!). I originally used my 4X ND filter but it wasn't dark enough.

[GaryS]

Yeah, I know where I can get em, I've just been too lazy and cheap!

I have variations of each shot where I varied the aperture in both directions (to see both more and less milky), but these were the ones I was happiest with. The longer shutter speeds just lost too much detail in these shots, and that took away from the photo.

What I've been doing lately for running water is to compose the photo, then shoot different shutter speeds so that I can see later what worked the best.

I have some more to post over the next few days, and some of those look best with the super-soft flows....

[adam75south]

You lost me on that one Adam.
it's a terrible show on vh1 that i just can't seem to quit watching when i got nothing better to do. a bunch of skanky girls trying to get with flavor flav, set up like that tv show the bachelor where he boots off a girl every week til there's two left.

anyway, i was just being goofy. i'm actually jealous because i love being in the outdoors...just don't do it as often as i'd like.

[Visual Reality]

I have variations of each shot where I varied the aperture in both directions (to see both more and less milky), but these were the ones I was happiest with. The longer shutter speeds just lost too much detail in these shots, and that took away from the photo.
It's probably a combination of wind blowing the leaves around, plus light diffraction after stopping down past F13. Every notch after that is going to be less and less sharp due to diffraction.

[GaryS]

It's probably a combination of wind blowing the leaves around, plus light diffraction after stopping down past F13. Every notch after that is going to be less and less sharp due to diffraction.

That was not what I meant at all....

Fast shutters give you waterfalls with very distinct splashes of water which can work well for showing the power of the water. Very slow shutters give that super milky effect. In between are many different levels.... Depending on the the effect you want in your photo, and on the look and detail of the fall, you choose the best shutter speed.

[d0hboy]

(Excuse the uninformed question) So are ND filters the key to this effect, or the the combination of [stop down aperture/slow down shutter/drop the ISO]?

[Visual Reality]

You want slow shutter speeds, so you need to lose a lot of light.

Minimum ISO, stopped down aperture, and ND/CPL filters all get you there. Use whatever it takes to get the shutter speed you desire.

[GoneTomorrow]

You want slow shutter speeds, so you need to lose a lot of light.

Minimum ISO, stopped down aperture, and ND/CPL filters all get you there. Use whatever it takes to get the shutter speed you desire.

Also location and time of day. A nice shady stream under a thick canopy can get some slow speeds, but if you have strong sunlight (like I did), you need a nice dark ND filter.