Long or short exposure: When shooting moving water which is better or is there a time where appropriate and others when not? I find at times long exposure is over used. But where do we...

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

When shooting moving water which is better or is there a time where appropriate and others when not?
I find at times long exposure is over used.
But where do we draw the line or is it ever drawn?
Here are two shots at Rickets Glen, PA not far from our home as an example.
Both seem nice but is one style better than the other?
Please no other photos are needed for this discussion.

Celtis87

Perhaps it is overused, but I’m a fan of the “silky” water look.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Take a look at Canon R's posting in Black and White Photography:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-752767-1.html

Is it "appropriate?" Or is the point that the technique was used to create a high-impact, memorable work of art?

Manglesphoto Loc: 70 miles south of St.Louis

Architect1776 wrote:

When shooting moving water which is better or is there a time where appropriate and others when not?
I find at times long exposure is over used.
But where do we draw the line or is it ever drawn?
Here are two shots at Rickets Glen, PA not far from our home as an example.
Both seem nice but is one style better than the other?

Some silky water is nice however I prefer to have more real water in the image.
Truthfully there is no answer for your question

PoppieJ Loc: North Georgia

imo i think as long as you haven't overexposed your water and turned it into a white blob then it is your choice

Manglesphoto Loc: 70 miles south of St.Louis

PoppieJ wrote:

imo i think as long as you haven't overexposed your water and turned it into a white blob then it is your choice

No matter what is always the photographers choice!!

Orphoto Loc: Oregon

The degree of water movement showing varies at any given shutter speed with the waters flow rate. As to the effect desired, it is an artistic decision. Occassionally I prefer high speed stop action. Ussually i go for moderately silky (about 1/2 sec). If i am trying to emphasize stationary rocks/edges really long. Transitional effects like oscillating water splashes show up around 1/15.
I agree no one overall objective best for all situations.

BebuLamar

I like the top one better. The shutter speed isn't fast enough to freeze the water but not making it looking unrealistic. I do use time exposure but not for such effect but only to get sufficient exposure in low light.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

BebuLamar wrote:

I like the top one better. The shutter speed isn't fast enough to freeze the water but not making it looking unrealistic. I do use time exposure but not for such effect but only to get sufficient exposure in low light.

I agree, that totally stopped action or movement in many cases is not desired as it looks odd.

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

I almost aways prefer the silky water effect.

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

Architect1776 wrote:

When shooting moving water which is better or is there a time where appropriate and others when not?
I find at times long exposure is over used.
But where do we draw the line or is it ever drawn?
Here are two shots at Rickets Glen, PA not far from our home as an example.
Both seem nice but is one style better than the other?
Please no other photos are needed for this discussion.

IMHO, I think that the first pic has both the soft water and detail in the rocks and leaves, while the second pic is just way too soft for me.
I'm just glad that you didn't ask for comments on the colors, grin.
Best Wishes,
JimmyT* Sends

*Your Color Blind UHH Friend

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

For me it depends on the way the result looks, the aesthetics of each.
Of there two, I like the long exposure more.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Jimmy T wrote:

IMHO, I think that the first pic has both the soft... (show quote)

Come on, give me your thoughts on the colors, you could do as well as many others here.

Actually it must be interesting to live in a color world with no color acuity.

dbrugger25 Loc: Raleigh, NC

It is just a matter of preference and one opinion is just as valid as any other. I like the one that shows detail in this case. I have seen moving water scenes that were long exposures that had a beautiful, artistic look to them.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

dbrugger25 wrote:

... I have seen moving water scenes that were long exposures that had a beautiful, artistic look to them.

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-752767-1.html

.