Flow with the Obstacles

[DScience]

Flow with the Obstacle by Daniel Sanculi, on Flickr

 

[WesternGuy]

Not bad. I like that most of the image is in focus, even into the background. I think the exposure is a bit long as there is no "flow" detail in the foreground water and it is slightly blown out. I shoot a lot of these types of images, so if you tell me you exposure details, maybe I can make a suggestion. Also, if you have a polarizer, it works quite well to reduce the "glare" off the flowing water and may help with the slight over exposure.

WesternGuy

 

[DScience]

Not bad. I like that most of the image is in focus, even into the background. I think the exposure is a bit long as there is no "flow" detail in the foreground water and it is slightly blown out. I shoot a lot of these types of images, so if you tell me you exposure details, maybe I can make a suggestion. Also, if you have a polarizer, it works quite well to reduce the "glare" off the flowing water and may help with the slight over exposure.

WesternGuy

Thanks for the feedback!

I'm just starting with landscape photography, thus I appreciate the comments. I was using a 10 stop ND filter, and thus couldn't put a polarizer on the front, but I do use them for other images.

F/14, 6 seconds, ISO 50

BTW, I looked at your flickr and only saw one long exposure of water. Do you have any others you'd like to share?

 

[bulldurham]

Put the polarizer on first, then the 10 stop.

 

[DScience]

Put the polarizer on first, then the 10 stop.

But it's a circular polarizer. Thus if I put it on, then the 10 stop ND, I won't know if the polarizer is rotated in the correct orientation (because you can't see anything through the 10 stop filter). And screwing the 10 stop onto the polarizer will surely rotate the polarizer.

Any suggestions? The only thing i've thought of is to invest in a LEE set up.

 

[bulldurham]

I see the dilemma. I use a front loaded Lee 10 ND so don't have that issue.

 

[WesternGuy]

Not bad. I like that most of the image is in focus, even into the background. I think the exposure is a bit long as there is no "flow" detail in the foreground water and it is slightly blown out. I shoot a lot of these types of images, so if you tell me you exposure details, maybe I can make a suggestion. Also, if you have a polarizer, it works quite well to reduce the "glare" off the flowing water and may help with the slight over exposure.

WesternGuy

Thanks for the feedback!

I'm just starting with landscape photography, thus I appreciate the comments. I was using a 10 stop ND filter, and thus couldn't put a polarizer on the front, but I do use them for other images.

F/14, 6 seconds, ISO 50

BTW, I looked at your flickr and only saw one long exposure of water. Do you have any others you'd like to share?

Which 10 stop system are you using? I use the Lee system and have no problems with their polarizer. You could drop to a 6 stop ND (screw-on), if you have one, and keep everything else the same and see what happens with a polarizer. I am a great believer in experimenting, so in a situation like yours here, I would probably have taken at least 5 or more images at different settings to try and get what I wanted.

Your timing of 6 seconds seems a little long, even with a 10 stop ND. Personally I would experiment with 3 seconds and see if that helps "flow lines" show up.

I probably do have other "flowing waters images", I just haven't put them on my Flickr site. I know I have a bunch from the Columbia River Gorge that I shot a few years ago. If I can find them, I will put them up in a separate album and let you know.

You said that you are just starting out in landscape photography, so, if I can suggest, if you haven't done it already, find one, two or three landscape photographers whose work you admire and study their works. A couple of my favourites are Alain Briot and Guy Tal. Subscribe to their newsletters and follow their blogs. You would be surprised how much you can learn or maybe you wouldn't(?).

WesternGuy

 

[otherprof]

Flow with the Obstacle by Daniel Sanculi, on Flickr

Beautiful image. Just one man's opinion, but one man who has been right before . . .

 

[DScience]

Not bad. I like that most of the image is in focus, even into the background. I think the exposure is a bit long as there is no "flow" detail in the foreground water and it is slightly blown out. I shoot a lot of these types of images, so if you tell me you exposure details, maybe I can make a suggestion. Also, if you have a polarizer, it works quite well to reduce the "glare" off the flowing water and may help with the slight over exposure.

WesternGuy

Thanks for the feedback!

I'm just starting with landscape photography, thus I appreciate the comments. I was using a 10 stop ND filter, and thus couldn't put a polarizer on the front, but I do use them for other images.

F/14, 6 seconds, ISO 50

BTW, I looked at your flickr and only saw one long exposure of water. Do you have any others you'd like to share?

Which 10 stop system are you using? I use the Lee system and have no problems with their polarizer. You could drop to a 6 stop ND (screw-on), if you have one, and keep everything else the same and see what happens with a polarizer. I am a great believer in experimenting, so in a situation like yours here, I would probably have taken at least 5 or more images at different settings to try and get what I wanted.

Your timing of 6 seconds seems a little long, even with a 10 stop ND. Personally I would experiment with 3 seconds and see if that helps "flow lines" show up.

I probably do have other "flowing waters images", I just haven't put them on my Flickr site. I know I have a bunch from the Columbia River Gorge that I shot a few years ago. If I can find them, I will put them up in a separate album and let you know.

You said that you are just starting out in landscape photography, so, if I can suggest, if you haven't done it already, find one, two or three landscape photographers whose work you admire and study their works. A couple of my favourites are Alain Briot and Guy Tal. Subscribe to their newsletters and follow their blogs. You would be surprised how much you can learn or maybe you wouldn't(?).

WesternGuy

WesternGuy

Thanks, i'll try different length shutter speeds next time.

I'm just using screw on filters at the moment, haven't had the budget to invest in a better system (Lee).

Flow with the Obstacle by Daniel Sanculi, on Flickr

Beautiful image. Just one man's opinion, but one man who has been right before . . .

Thanks a lot friend!

 

[crimbfighter]

Put the polarizer on first, then the 10 stop.

But it's a circular polarizer. Thus if I put it on, then the 10 stop ND, I won't know if the polarizer is rotated in the correct orientation (because you can't see anything through the 10 stop filter). And screwing the 10 stop onto the polarizer will surely rotate the polarizer.

Any suggestions? The only thing i've thought of is to invest in a LEE set up.

Just a thought, but you could set your polorizer first and mark the outer ring for realignment with something easy to remove such as colored pencil. Then apply your ND filter and realign the polorizer with the marks.

 

[DScience]

Put the polarizer on first, then the 10 stop.

But it's a circular polarizer. Thus if I put it on, then the 10 stop ND, I won't know if the polarizer is rotated in the correct orientation (because you can't see anything through the 10 stop filter). And screwing the 10 stop onto the polarizer will surely rotate the polarizer.

Any suggestions? The only thing i've thought of is to invest in a LEE set up.

Just a thought, but you could set your polorizer first and mark the outer ring for realignment with something easy to remove such as colored pencil. Then apply your ND filter and realign the polorizer with the marks.

Great idea friend! I'll try that this weekend up in the mountains.