Water drops - my first attempt c&c please

[Bynx]

Buckster dont get me wrong, I like the shots you posted, but when I get my own StopShot I will at least give credit to the machine which took the picture. Its a little misleading if you fail to mention the machine and lead people to think you are some kind of creative genius with the quickest finger on the planet. As for my HDR shots, you are absolutely right. I couldnt create them without the use of Photomatix and Photoshop. But the exposures I used were all taken by me, manually. Also I do acknowledge my use of the software and give them the credit they deserve. On a final thought, I think your hostility to me, arises from my letting the cat out of the bag.

 

[Buckster]

Buckster dont get me wrong, I like the shots you posted, but when I get my own StopShot I will at least give credit to the machine which took the picture. Its a little misleading if you fail to mention the machine and lead people to think you are some kind of creative genius with the quickest finger on the planet.

Using any of the many various triggers, from sound triggers, to pressure triggers, to IR triggers, to laser triggers, to speed calculation triggers to light triggers to simple slave triggers for the many, many, MANY kinds of photography they're used for, especially specialized photography, is nothing new, nothing misleading and nothing to accuse someone of being unethical about using. Anyone who pursues such photographic endeavors quickly finds that such solutions are the norm.

They are simply tools that a photographer uses to get the shots they want and to make the tasks easier to perform, like any other of the many tools we use to make compelling photos. It's no more unethical than setting up artificial lights and modifiers, snoots and grids, gels and gobos, and all the rest of it to make it look like our model is being lit by a large window with an interesting lace covering, when in fact there may be no window in the room at all.

We will simply have to agree to disagree that I, or anyone else who uses any of the many triggers out there, is unethical, misleading or "not the photographer" of the images they create using such varied methods. You can say they are all those things if that's your take on it, while I say they're not. No skin lost on either side.

In closing, I will also point out that, when asked for details, I have never been shy about revealing my techniques and providing full disclosure, and have always been willing to share full details with all. These are links to specific posts of mine in those same threads where I did exactly that:

Page one of one of the threads I linked to: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/macro-photography/265618-drip-drip-drip.html#post2419107

On page two of one of the same thread as above: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/macro-photography/265618-drip-drip-drip-2.html#post2419357

Page two of another of the threads I linked to: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/macro-photography/178920-milk-drops-2.html#post1736587

So much for your "cat out of the bag" theory.

If that's not enough to satisfy you on the whole disclosure issue, and your accusation that I'm trying to lie to people and mislead them and convince them that I have the fastest trigger finger on the planet, then I just don't know what to tell you, and tbh, it's not really concerning me very much.

 

[jwbryson1]

I always enjoy your images Buckster. Thanks for the info. I have a couple of questions:

if your shutter is already open, you won't get any vibration from mirror slap when you trigger the flash to take the shot

By the above quote, do you mean that these should be done in "live view" so that the mirror is locked up? I don't follow.

My shutter time on these is 4 seconds long each, with an aperture of f/22.

On this issue--are you taking multiple shots? I don't quite grasp how the long SS works.

 

[Bynx]

Ok, now to the nitty gritty. I recently lost out to an umbrella shot such as those you posted. I dont mind losing, but not to a machine. Im thinking seriously about getting a StopShot gyzmo, because Im always shooting things that interest me. Things like stop action, high speed stuff, super macro, HDR etc. But when its not me that decides when to take the pic, well that bothers me. Just to start something in motion and watching a chain of events take place with no intervention takes the joy of a nice shot like those umbrella ones. After rereading through your site I went back and tried some more drop shots. I did get an interesting effect using low light and the flash during a longer shutter speed. I got a trail as the ball of water moved either up or down. It was faint but worth the effort. I want to thank you for your explanation on the ethics of machine pictures. Its a very fine line Im talking about and I feel that when a machine decides when to take the picture then that line is crossed. There should be a special category for shots that are taken like that. In the case where I lost out, the pic was actually underexposed, and slightly out of focus. But the judges were impressed on seeing that unusual umbrella shot and didnt judge it on its actual technical qualities, not understanding how easy that shot is if you have the expensive machine. Have you the option to shoot high speed like a bullet or pellet piercing a water filled balloon or a light bulb?

 

[Buckster]

I always enjoy your images Buckster. Thanks for the info.

Thank you kindly. Always glad to help if I can.

I have a couple of questions:

if your shutter is already open, you won't get any vibration from mirror slap when you trigger the flash to take the shot

By the above quote, do you mean that these should be done in "live view" so that the mirror is locked up? I don't follow.

No, I almost never use live view, other than for shooting through my microscope.

What I mean is that when you trip open the shutter, there's a short period of vibration from that action. If you don't actually shoot the photo during that vibration period, you will avoid any camera shake and blur that it might cause.

The idea is that you dial in all your variables; ISO, aperture, shutter and focus. Dial them in and lock them down so they can't move. Darken the room and open the shutter. If there's no light, that shutter could be open indefinitely, and nothing would show up in the photo. But, if at any time while it's open a flash were to suddenly go off, you now have a photo, and it doesn't matter when that happens while the shutter is open.

So, you don't have to be viewing through the camera's viewfinder or even live view. You just have to be paying attention to the drips, timing them as they drip (or being unethical and using a machine that does all the work, if you have Bynx's mindset, LOL), and then firing that flash at the moment of the splash. The interesting thing is that you can see it when you catch it, even before it comes up in the chimp-view on the back of the camera, because the suddenly bright splash burns it into your retina for the split second it fires.

So, that means the room isn't deep-cave-can't-see-your-hand-in-front-of-your-face dark, just dark enough so that you can use a long shutter without overexposure, but just light enough that you can see what you're doing. Allowing your eyes to adjust to the dimness can help.

My shutter time on these is 4 seconds long each, with an aperture of f/22.

On this issue--are you taking multiple shots? I don't quite grasp how the long SS works.

See above.

Imagine you're in a dark room, with no light at all coming in from anywhere. You can't see a thing. You open the shutter, and leave it open for 4 seconds, or 30 seconds, or a minute, or five minutes - doesn't matter - you leave it open for a long time. During that time, there is still no light at all in the room. What do you get as a result? A photo of black nothingness.

But fire a flash at ANY time during that long exposure, and what do you get? Whatever was going on in front of the lens at the precise moment when the flash went off. If there was a splash taking place, that's what you get a photo of.

Basically, by using the long exposure in a dim room, you take the shutter speed out of the equation, allowing the flash to freeze the action.

Hope that helps. Keep asking if you have any other questions! I'm an open book and will help if I can!

 

[Buckster]

After rereading through your site I went back and tried some more drop shots. I did get an interesting effect using low light and the flash during a longer shutter speed. I got a trail as the ball of water moved either up or down. It was faint but worth the effort. I want to thank you for your explanation on the ethics of machine pictures.

You're very welcome. I'm always glad if I can help in any way.

Have you the option to shoot high speed like a bullet or pellet piercing a water filled balloon or a light bulb?

Yes, I've got a whole range of sensors and triggers I've acquired or built over time, including a couple that work with projectiles and sound, which are both commonly used for those types of shots. I intend work on some of those this summer, actually.

 

[Bynx]

With your suggestion to do a slower shutter speed the room I was in wasnt quite dark enough so it left a feint trail as the ball moved up. With the fstop at f22 I couldnt get the proper exposure. But it sure made getting it sharp. Here is an example from today's attempt.

 

[Buckster]

With your suggestion to do a slower shutter speed the room I was in wasnt quite dark enough so it left a feint trail as the ball moved up. With the fstop at f22 I couldnt get the proper exposure. But it sure made getting it sharp. Here is an example from today's attempt.

Very nice! Glad that's working well for you. You'll have it perfected in no time now! I must say, I rather like that faint trail thing - makes it more interesting!

 

[Ernicus]

That image of your setup is pretty extensive. Makes me feel silly trying to hold a glass of milk over a bowl of water and capturing a drop when it hit. LOL.

 

[Buckster]

That image of your setup is pretty extensive. Makes me feel silly trying to hold a glass of milk over a bowl of water and capturing a drop when it hit. LOL.

No need to feel silly - that's pretty close to the way I first tried to get these kinds of images too! You just learn new methods and pick up tips and gear over time, if you like it enough to stick with it.

 

[Bynx]

Buckster please check out this site....Liquid Drop Art - Photography by Corrie White

They are all a result of the machine. Can you explain some of the more elaborate shapes. Some I dont understand at all.

 

[Buckster]

Buckster please check out this site....Liquid Drop Art - Photography by Corrie White

They are all a result of the machine. Can you explain some of the more elaborate shapes. Some I dont understand at all.

Yeah, that is some really awesome stuff and I've seen some of the setups over the years.

The cloudy, wispy looking stuff is captured underwater, using a speaker and an osciliscope underneath the tank's bottom to excite inks, dyes and so on at the bottom of the tank, which makes them "jump" in patterns, depending on the frequencies generated. It's done out in the air as well, and you can tell which is which just by the look of them.

The multiple splash/umbrella/mushroom looking shapes above the surface is done with as many as several drip pumps and timers all working in concert in just a crazy complicated array of a setup that takes a PILE of patience to put together and fine tune to finally get them to make that sort of stuff.

A big part of the "secret" to both is that the various fluids used are of varying viscosity, with some being the consistency of water, others the consistency of oil. That makes them react differently from one another upon impact, and really amps up the interest.

Guar gum is popular for thickening water to varying degrees to do that, and clear ethylene glycol based coolant is also used a lot for those shots because it's kind of syrupy and holds together well even after impact, making those interesting and elongated umbrella-like structures.

 

[Bynx]

The artistic aspects are so various it makes me think that the machine will be a good investment. Sorry for pushing your buttons but I wanted to be convinced it was a good thing. It still does cross that line to me, but the artistic creations are done by the machines owner. Thanks Buckster.

 

[Rodz]

Very nice

 

[Buckster]

The artistic aspects are so various it makes me think that the machine will be a good investment. Sorry for pushing your buttons but I wanted to be convinced it was a good thing. It still does cross that line to me, but the artistic creations are done by the machines owner. Thanks Buckster.

No worries man! Always glad to help if I can! All's well that ends well! :thumbup: