long exposer of river

[Maxwell]

Some rapids beside my college

 

[Maxwell]

anyone?

 

[CalebPhotographer]

Very wonderful! I've always wondered how shots like these were done, where the water appears to be almost milky.

It came out great! Makes me want to try one. The rocks in the middle look interesting, too.

 

[pantherlax]

I like it alot. How long was the exposure?

 

[skieur]

Other than the water, the rocks and the background should be tack sharp. That is not the case. What happened?

skieur

 

[iflynething]

Ditto. Was a tripod used?

~Michael~

 

[ShaCow]

nice

 

[Maxwell]

yes i did use a tripod, not sure why it was not as sharp as i wanted.

i used a 2/1 shutter speed

thanks alot for the comments and feedback thanks brad

 

[Mesoam]

a bit too saturated...greens are way to green and the background black feels washed...

 

[Maxwell]

explain black washed?

 

[D-50]

The colors have been way to overprocessed. The water is too blue/purple and the green is way too saturated. Taking out the long exposure of the water there is nothing interesting to this photo, no clear subject, statement or point. With long exposures you need to remember that the effect of the long exposure is not enough to create an interesting picture. You need to consider composition, framing, lighting, etc. Light trails from a car, running water, and other things that change appearence with long exposures are boring unless there is something unique about the overall photo. Had therte been a bird/animal on the rock that would have added something to this photo, had you gotten real low close to water level that would have been a bit more dramatic, had you got into the river and shot down the river something more interesting may have occured.