Midday Long Exposure | No ND

[Braineack]

I was trying to capture the movement of the clouds traveling over time, much like you would if you took this same shot over a full 10 minutes with a 12 stop ND filter or alike--without a 12-stop ND filter or alike--similar to almost every picture on 500px.com. I said it like 15 times now. It was literally technique for technique's sake. it was my first attempt and i came away with lessons learned and i wanted to share it.

i could care less about natural cloud formations, I wanted to show movement and blur.

If I wanted to show them off, I'd have posted this:


Bethany Beach Sunrise From Dunes by The Braineack, on Flickr

 

[Tim Tucker]

Perhaps you should care about natural cloud formations, because as I've said they're naturally soft and blurred. After all they are just condensation in the atmosphere. I just walked out in my back yard (literally this afternoon, because of this conversation) and shot this with a sharp lens focussed on infinity at 1/640sec f5.6. All I've done is convert to sRGB, jpeg and reduced by 50% (which should increase apparent sharpness). Absolutely no jiggery-pokery, this is how clouds can and do look in the natural environment. So what is somebody who couldn't give a damn about the effort you put into your shot going to see? Something special, or something the see almost every day when they look out of the window. Trying to capture the moment in cloud by blurring them is a fairly pointless exercise because they commonly look like that anyway. I sometimes wonder that photographers get so wrapped up with what they're doing and the meaning they attach to it they forget to take into account that it's pretty similar to what everybody sees when they look out of their own window at the real world. Absolutely no offence meant, and much respect for you technical skills.

 

[jcdeboever]

I was trying to capture the movement of the clouds traveling over time, much like you would if you took this same shot over a full 10 minutes with a 12 stop ND filter or alike--without a 12-stop ND filter or alike--similar to almost every picture on 500px.com. I said it like 15 times now. It was literally technique for technique's sake. it was my first attempt and i came away with lessons learned and i wanted to share it.

i could care less about natural cloud formations, I wanted to show movement and blur.

If I wanted to show them off, I'd have posted this:


Bethany Beach Sunrise From Dunes by The Braineack, on Flickr

Daddy issues [emoji13]

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Braineack]

not soft or blurred.



still none.



Just because you live under a constant dark cloud, doesn't mean we all do...

capturing images at all is kinda pointless because we can see things and remember them.

 

[Braineack]

and you wouldnt really be able to achieve the look, that I'm going for (i.e. not static clouds without any movement whatsoever) with just a blur tool.

here is the same shot with the the cloud motion blurred:




now 20 images over a 10min period stacked:




this is similar to the long I'm trying to achieve, but it's still not quite right. I want to capture the movement of the clouds over time. you can't do that at 1/650sec. I want to do it over 650 full seconds...


this technique might be better for water, or maybe if the clouds were moving directly towards the camera and not off at an angle. One things for sure is i need more frames at quicker intervals so there's less gaps in time.

 

[Braineack]

This guy seems to be doing what I was aiming to achieve:

Time Stacks

But I wanted to blended the layers into one smooth trail.

Looks like some of these are over 500 images large.

 

[thereyougo!]

it's ok I suppose, but personally, I'd rather spend more time out in the open air shooting than looking at a screen for longer than necessary...

Pure semantics I suppose, but these aren't long exposures. They are stacked exposures.

 

[Braineack]

it's ok I suppose, but personally, I'd rather spend more time out in the open air shooting than looking at a screen for longer than necessary...

Pure semantics I suppose, but these aren't long exposures. They are stacked exposures.

I post-process all my images, I didn't spend much longer stacking and blending these that I would normally editing a photo.

and yes, they are stacked exposures. Again, I've said that like 28 times now. The idea was to try to mimic a long exposure in daylight, without the use of welding glass, by stacked and blending multiple exposures. Personally, I like long exposure land/skyscapes but I didn't happen to have a $300 ND filter available to use to capture a 10min shot at noon. I wanted to see if I could do something to mimic it without special equipment.

So what is your point here? You like to shoot a bunch of snapshots without any thought process behind them and don't post-process. cool.

 

[Derrel]

Wow...so much aggro man. You're acting like a high school boy.

 

[Braineack]

Wow...so much aggro man. You're acting like a high school boy.

lets me get out my morning rush hour jollies out.

 

[astroNikon]

I like cameras


and telescopes


well, mostly telescopes but you need the camera to capture pictures as pulling film outta my brain ain't gonna happen.

 

[Braineack]

I like cameras


and telescopes


well, mostly telescopes but you need the camera to capture pictures as pulling film outta my brain ain't gonna happen.

telescopes seem like an elaborate way to just take a shot at 50mm and crop down significantly.

 

[thereyougo!]

it's ok I suppose, but personally, I'd rather spend more time out in the open air shooting than looking at a screen for longer than necessary...

Pure semantics I suppose, but these aren't long exposures. They are stacked exposures.

I post-process all my images, I didn't spend much longer stacking and blending these that I would normally editing a photo.

and yes, they are stacked exposures. Again, I've said that like 28 times now. The idea was to try to mimic a long exposure in daylight, without the use of welding glass, by stacked and blending multiple exposures. Personally, I like long exposure land/skyscapes but I didn't happen to have a $300 ND filter available to use to capture a 10min shot at noon. I wanted to see if I could do something to mimic it without special equipment.

So what is your point here? You like to shoot a bunch of snapshots without any thought process behind them and don't post-process. cool.

Why so defensive? I wasn't having a pop. My point is that for me it's not an alternative to the real thing, at least, not for me.
One or two photographic magazines in the UK, Digital Camera World and Practical Photography that spend longer showing how to swap skies or to do what you have done as if it is a real alternative.

I'm not a purist, well not altogether, but I do think we should get as much as possible right in camera, then polish in post processing. The creation part in my view is in taking the shot. Everything else is to do with getting as much from the initial creation as possible. Of course YMMV.

 

[Braineack]

Do you like natural skies?

using tapatalk.

 

[sleist]

What do you have against filters?
I like the experimentation and applaud the effort and learning curve in PS.
I just don't understand why the negative attitude toward filters.