Landscape noob

[DannyScene]

Hey Guys,

Couldn't find the answer by searching so thought I'd start a thread

I've been doing Urban Explring for just over a year now and as such have got quite into photography, I was using a Nikon 995 up until January time at which point I decided to get a D3100

Anyway I've now decided thanks to the Random Photos thread I would like to do some landscape, in particular ones with moving water in them on a long exposure to get the nice smoky/whispy effect

My question is how the hell do I set a long enough exposure to get the movement in there without flooding out the picture in light?

I'm sure there are things you can use that are basically sunglasses for your camera but I have no idea what they are called, tried googling 'sunglasses for DSLR' but obviously that returned fk all

I appreciate any replies you guys will take the time out to give

[Mr Will]

Neutral Density Filters

[JSS 911]

ND filters,this was taken on a fairly bright day using a Hoya 110,which gives you 9 stops,which gave me about a 3sec exposure.


The relentless battle of the ellements by sinky 911, on Flickr

[eltawater]

http://www.markmullenphotography.co.uk/blog/2012/8...

Our very own Mark Mullen is an excellent place to start reading!

[paul911]

As above, ND filters to reduce the amount of light entering the camera, st slow the exposure down. To get a long exposure in daylight you’re going to need a 10 stop (or similar) filter. Or you could stack a few filters and use a small aperture. Or cheaper still use some welding glass, but they do have a tendency to leave a nasty colour cast.

LEE 10 stopper in daylight...


Brothers Water by paulsflicker, on Flickr


Perch Rock lighthouse by paulsflicker, on Flickr


10 stops - 10 steps by paulsflicker, on Flickr

[DannyScene]

Thank all very much for the helpful replies
Those pictures are exactly what I had in mind although mine wont be that good haha
Ill give the mark mullen thing a read and look into some ND filters

Again thanks guys, much appreciated

[DibblyDobbler]

Probably worth adding that you can also use a very small aperture (ie high f number - f22 for instance) combined with iso 100 to give a slower than normal shutter (Camera on Aperture Priority). If you're doing a sunset shot in fading light you can get quite a slow shutter just by doing this - in normal light you'll need the filters as above.

PS - slow shots generally mean you'll need a tripod or some other means of holding the camera steady!

[DannyScene]

Cheers mate I'll give that a go this weekend!
I have a smallish tripod but im going to get a bigger more sturdy one

[markmullen]

I can't really add anything to what's been said other than I hope my blog helps and I look forward to seeing your results. Shout up if I can help at all.

[RobDickinson]

I find the lee big stopper tricky to use! But when you get it right is fulfilling.

I dont often do super long water exposure , I usually like some movement I think it adds more impact, mostly.

And movement is dependant on subject distance too, you can get reasonable shutter speeds for some movement without ND filters at dawn and dusk/blue/golden hours. But I almost always shoot with ND grad filters to fix the foreground/sky exposures.

[jaik]

It's worth bearing in kind that you ideally don't want your aperture too small (too high an f-number). Once you go smaller than about f/11 you may start getting a softer image. This is down to diffraction in the lens.

Try taking the same shot at f/8 and f/22; the one at f/22 will usually be noticeably less sharp. It can still be totally useable, it's just something to be aware of.

[The Jolly Todger]

Another option is to shoot when there is less light, even in practically total darkness you can make an image as long as there is some light around. Experiment with 30 second+ exposures on a moonlit night and see what you get.

[DibblyDobbler]

jaik said:

It's worth bearing in kind that you ideally don't want your aperture too small (too high an f-number). Once you go smaller than about f/11 you may start getting a softer image. This is down to diffraction in the lens.

Try taking the same shot at f/8 and f/22; the one at f/22 will usually be noticeably less sharp. It can still be totally useable, it's just something to be aware of.

This is correct but you can get the front cover of a photo mag with f22 and iso1000 these days it seems (see other thread )

[DannyScene]

The Jolly Todger said:

Another option is to shoot when there is less light, even in practically total darkness you can make an image as long as there is some light around. Experiment with 30 second+ exposures on a moonlit night and see what you get.

I've experimented with this on the golf course a few nights ago while I was trying to do some star trails the lighting you get from the moon on a long exposure really does look great

My next mission like I say is to throw some moving water in there

Once I've tried some of the tips on here Ill post my attempts here for any critique if anyone wouldnt mind



Not sure if it has any bearing but I only have the 18-55mm kit lens until I can afford some nicer glass

[The Jolly Todger]

DannyScene said:

Not sure if it has any bearing but I only have the 18-55mm kit lens until I can afford some nicer glass

Using a kit lens shouldn't make any difference. The only thing I would look at is if spending a lot of money on circular filters, bear in mind the filter size required by any future lenses you think you may by. The kit lens will probably have a filter size of 52mm, if you buy a 52mm filter and then by a lens with a 77mm filter thread, you won't be able to use your filter on it. A better option would be to buy a 77mm filter from the outset and use an adapter to step it down to 52.

I hope that makes sense.

[DannyScene]

The Jolly Todger said:

DannyScene said:

Not sure if it has any bearing but I only have the 18-55mm kit lens until I can afford some nicer glass

Using a kit lens shouldn't make any difference. The only thing I would look at is if spending a lot of money on circular filters, bear in mind the filter size required by any future lenses you think you may by. The kit lens will probably have a filter size of 52mm, if you buy a 52mm filter and then by a lens with a 77mm filter thread, you won't be able to use your filter on it. A better option would be to buy a 77mm filter from the outset and use an adapter to step it down to 52.

I hope that makes sense.

That makes perfect sense mate!

I'm glad you mentioned it because in my uneducated mind all lenses were the same at the end (stupid thing to think I know)

thank you all again for the help

I'm heading out tonight around sunset to the local woods where there is a bit of astream to have a play about

[Simpo Two]

Sometimes you don't even need an adaptor ring - just hold the filter in front of the lens while you take the shot.

[Speed addicted]

You can use welding glass as a very cheap 10 stop if you just want to try it. To be honest for the amount of 10 stop shots I do I might as well have stuck with the bodge rather than buying a filter.