Moving Water

[olf]

Not been much cop at capturing moving water over the years, this is my best effort to date. What's the secret?

Edited by olf on Monday 9th October 21:52

[Andy M]

Put your ISO to its lowest (ISO 50-100 if possible), crank your aperture to it's smallest (f22 on most lenses), and use a remote shutter cable with your camera on a tripod.

That's what I do

[le gravy noire]

This is water:



in amazing.

[Gemm]

Andy M said:

Put your ISO to its lowest (ISO 50-100 if possible), crank your aperture to it's smallest (f22 on most lenses), and use a remote shutter cable with your camera on a tripod.

That's what I do

You might also need a ND filter during the day to get slow enough shutter speed.

Yes, water captured with slow shutter speed is beautiful.

[Andy M]

Gemm said:

You might also need a ND filter during the day to get slow enough shutter speed.

Yep, I needed an ND when shooting these:





Both were at ISO50 and f22 but still I couldn't get the desired effect. Time to invest in some filters me thinks...

[Gemm]

I've used ND filter and polariser at the same time for desperate situations and they worked fine. If you need even longer shutter speed, you can always over-expose slightly (e.g. +1/3 or +1/2 stop) to squeeze a bit more.

[olf]

Okay that's all sounding good because when I look back at the EXIF data for a load of shots of moving water the best ones have Apeture of 5.6 and ISO of 80 or 100... The bad ones are f2.8 and or ISO 400. Thanks all.

[olf]

oh hang on f5.6 isn't small is it?

Edited by olf on Tuesday 10th October 18:00

[Andy M]

No

Try again with ISO 100 & your lens' maximum aperture (f22ish).

[matthew_h]

Do you really need to go as far as the smallest aperture? Aren't most lenses a bit soft when you get to the extremes? Would an aperture of around, say, f11 be sufficient to get a decent depth of field or is there another reason for the slow aperture?

[matthew_h]

I've just thought about it. It'll be to get a long enough shutter won't it?

Penny drops...

[KB_S1]

I have found that the time of day helps too.
This was iso 200 (lowest my camera goes), f22, 13s exposure with a nikkor 60mm prime.
Used a tripod and suffered the midge's.

[Dibble]

[dope] What's an ND filter (in plain English, please)? [/dope]

[robdickinson]

neutral density filter.

basicaly a grey filter that reduces light, by 1, 2 or 4 fstops or so.

[Gemm]

Dibble said:

[dope] What's an ND filter (in plain English, please)? [/dope]

Neutral Density filter. It's a dark coloured filter used to reduce the amount of light that can pass through the lens. They come in different strength, adding 1 stop, 2 stops, etc. For example, ND 8x filter will add 3 stops, so the normal exposure of 1/30s, f8, will become 1/4s, f8 (3 stops). Was that plain enough?

[jwyatt]

I used to do quite a lot of this (sorry, pics not to hand - in fact, mostly on films I've not scanned). I soon tired of the misty look of long exposures, and deciced I liked about a 15th of a second, which I'll happily use with justa pole with a wide-angle with good results. That way you get more feeling of movement than with a really long exposure, though the latter works well in the right shot. Conversely, sometimes freezing the water works best. With DSLR's and adjustable everything, you might as well try plenty each time and see the effect!