Help....I was playing with my camera today by a waterfall...

Jeepnut28

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
418
Reaction score
0
I was trying to set a long shutter speed to capture the flow of the water.....I just kept getting a totally overexposed image....

i could not figure it out.....

the details:

it was a bright sunny day

i shoot with a canon 350D and i had the 18-55 kit lens on...

settings I tried:

manual exposure, ISO 100 on a tripod 6 second shutter speed......aperture was set from 32 all the way down to 16......my meter kept showing way over exposed

then I tried the TV (Time Value exposure) where I let the camera pick the aperture and I set the shutter speed....camera kept setting at 32 and blinking at over exposed.....

any ideas or tips?
 
For 'good' blurring of a waterful, you will probably only need 1-2 seconds of exposure. Next time, just put your shutter speed within 1-4seconds and experiment. Obviously if you want a small aperture, you will have longer exposures and such. From the sounds of it, it was simply too bright. The one other 'method' would be to use a ND filter.
 
A polarizer filter will cut another 2.5 stops off of that. And give you control of reflections in the water.
 
You really don't need to go that long to get the mist effect of flowing water, 1/4 of a sec or less will do it and always use a polarizer when shooting it, helps with the exposure and reflections.
 
are nd filters the same as polarisers?

I've heard them both described as sunglasses for your lenses. :)
 
Check out the exif info, exposure was only 1/8 of a second. Your exposure times are way too long.
water2bf2.jpg
 
Great! Thanks for the help. sounds like my shutter speed was way too long. I will try again soon.

it was frustrating to say the least.
 
I'd agree with the others wh osaid 6seconds is too long.
Here's my attempt and the exposure was 1/3 of a second.
GlenEtive.jpg
 
you get funny effects with water when you go to exposures over5 seconds ... can get very dreamy ;)

In bright sun you will need neutral density filters .. if it is not too bright a polarizer might do the job as it also reduces the light hitting the film or sensor.
 
also, a time rule is kind of silly, i've seen waterfall shots with exposures up to a minute (ansel adams in fact)

just depends on the light, there shouldn't be some rule of thumb imo
 
newrmdmike said:
just depends on the light, there shouldn't be some rule of thumb imo

Exactly, as you get different effects for different exposure times and different water speeds.

And every exposure time might give a nice image, but a different image. So paly around and decide what you like in the end :)
 
are nd filters the same as polarisers?
No - ND filters are as you described - sunglasses for your lens - they cut the amount of light reaching the lens, but have no effect on anything else.

Polarizers also cut the amount of light reaching your lens, but that is not their main purpose - they are used mainly to saturate the colours in an image, reduce glare and reflections from surfaces like water, leaves or glass, and to darken the blue of skies.
 
your title is misleading. for a sec i thought you dropped your camera in the water. glad to hear there wasnt any dmg. ive always wondered how they did those effects on water.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top