"Wispy" Water

[FieralDS]

Alright, so one type of photo I've been eager to shoot are the exposures of moving water which creates a wispy look to the water.

Does anyone have any reccomendations where to start exposure length wise?

I have a Nikon D70s and use an 18-70mm lens usually.

Thanks for all the help!

- D. J.

 

[Goontz]

Even a 1 second exposure time will start to create that effect. Start at 1s and work up if you like.

 

[512]

2 or 3 sec are a good time in many conditions. don't forget your ND filter

 

[Big]

Even if you don't have an ND filter, you should be able to get a decent exposure with a small aperture like f/22 or something

 

[thenikonguy]

dont forget to use your tripod..

 

[SushiWarrior]

I got a decent effect with just 1/8 on a little water "trickle"... can't even call it a waterfall. It was very bright out that day and I don't have an ND filter...

 

[DennyCrane]

This was a 1 second exposure, f/11, ISO-200
No tripod and it shows.

 

[fokker]

Is that a small fire in the middle of that waterfall??

 

[fiveoboy01]

I've gotten blurry water with as fast as 1/2 second. Just experiment... Shutter priority would be your best bet here. You definitely should have a tripod. Depending on how much ambient light exists, you may need a ND filter to prevent over exposure.

 

[mosu84]

Is that a small fire in the middle of that waterfall??

Seriously, what the hell is going on in that picture?

OP - throw a polarizing filter on and start taking pictures at 1/8 exposure. Increase exposure time as necessary depending on light and water flow.

 

[USAF-SSgt]

Is that a small fire in the middle of that waterfall??

Seriously, what the hell is going on in that picture?

***Beware: Nerdy comment ahead*****


It's either a bonfire for a Keebler elf or someone better call Frodo and tell him to bring that damn ring.

I don't know myself why that came into my head. I only have seen about 20 min of that movie, but it was my first thought. wow. sorry guys

 

[jnm]

what ND filter do you guys typically use? how many f-stop reductions do you use?

 

[bcshort]

As has been indicated in an earlier post, don't get fooled into thinking that to get silky water shots you have to shoot at 2 seconds or more. It depends a lot on how fast the water is flowing. Trickles/slow moving water you may need 2-3-4 seconds or more, but if you have a large waterfall with lots of water going over it, 1/10 could be as little as you need.

On an overcast day, or a shaded spot, you may get away with having the aperture closed down to f22, or something more appropriate may be the use of an ND8 filter that gives you 3 stops. Example from my flickr stream here

If however you are shooting where it is sunny, you need a serious ND Filter. I can't praise highly enough a B+W110 (ND1000) filter which gives 10 stops. Once again, Example here.

There is also such a thing as "overdoing" it with long exposures on fast moving water, to the point where you actually lose the detail of the water flow itself. You can see that happening in some areas of the first photo.

Cheers

 

[redtippmann]

This was f/22 and 1.3 seconds. At iso 200

I also had a 1 stop ND filter on so that helped slow the shutter by 2 clicks. And a blue gradent(sp?) filter darling the sky but that got croped out.

 

[DennyCrane]

(that's the eternal flame waterfall at Chestnut ridge park in western NY. It's a natural gas fissure that stays lit)