Almost all the suggestions made are good for blurring moving water.
If one has access to the coast the same techniques make some interesting images of wave action.
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
Travelfan wrote:
You are talking to somebody who has an "auto" camera for a reason...just like a car. No hassels. 10 stop? No idea what that means. Somebody said get a #6 B&W nd lens. I looked those up and the cost (for one or two times used) is out of this world. If I was 21 instead of 71 and get tons of years use I'd say yes. But with health problems I will get little use out of it. Lets go budget. I hope my Canon has a "simple setting" for what I need....otherwise buying a filter/tripod for me would be a waste. Besides...nobody has said "you should have used a nd filter/10 stop for that waterfall next time.
You are talking to somebody who has an "auto&... (
show quote)
This is a really good opportunity to learn what 10 stops means. You want the results with as little investment as possible - understanding, money, time, effort etc. There is no "simple setting" or magic bullet. You need to make a bit of an investment of all of the above. Being 71 does not entitle you to a license to be insulting to those offering their expertise for free.
I would like to get the "silky look" but at 71 have only used a tripod one time. I'm going to Glacier National Park in July but want to see as much as I can during those 7 days. Add in 2 days for travel from/to Spokane Airport after starting from Chicago (stop in Denver...SW does not fly direct.) I will practice at home some settings as I have never used them on my T71. I'll see how long the whole process takes me and see if it fits in with my goal of seeing all of the park I can.
I will need to practice with a tripod/nd filter.
Travelfan wrote:
I will need to practice with a tripod/nd filter.
May i suggest practicing on a lawn sprinkler in full daylight to get the same effect. Cars on the street can also play as the rushing water, where you try to keep everything in good exposure and the vehicles almost disappearing like wispy ghosts.
Personally a sharp picture where you can see the water droplets appeals to me. Just my preference.
Bruce M wrote:
Personally a sharp picture where you can see the water droplets appeals to me. Just my preference.
GOOD....Glad to see the other persons preference to photographing water. I like silky, and I like sharp interpretations of water. Perhaps I am just greedy, liking both ways.
Good morning. I'm sorry that you have been treated so roughly here in response to your completely valid question. Please understand that most folks here are pretty serious about photography...to the point that the photography and the equipment and the technique take precedence over all else sometimes. A ot of us also tend to be "one trick ponies," who know one way to do a thing and aren't disposed to consider other alternatives.
I do not have a camera like yours, so I'm going to end up referring you to the manual for a couple of things, but I do expect that you can do at least an approximation of the waterfall images you would like to capture without having to take a full semester photography class or going out and buying a boatload of equipment that you might not ever use again. So let's take a stab at it.
First...to smooth the motion of the water, you are going to need to take the longest exposure that you can manage with whatever equipment that you do have or do end up with. That means that the one thing that is not going to be negotiable is that you are going to need a tripod. Now the standard response here is that you need to spend hundreds of dollars for a rock solid tripod that will never move under any conditions, and that's really true. But it's also true that for this first venture, you can probably do with a much more basic one...one that will hold your camera steady for a second or two.
You are also going to need to spend a couple of minutes in your manual and learn how to set your camera for "Aperture Priority," then how to set it for a specific f-stop. You should be able to find those topics in the index. While looking for that, also look for how to set your ISO, which is the camera's sensitivity to light. (ANd make sure that you note how to get back to your automatic settings when you are finished with the waterfall.)
What we want to do is to be able to make your camera as "insensitive" to light as possible. That means setting it to the lowest ISO value possible. I read in an earlier response above that someone familiar with your camera (or at least the manual) indicated that was 100. If so, fine. If there are a couple of "Lo" options available below that, choose the one at the far end of the scale.
Now we want to make the lens pass the least amount of light possible. We don't care about diffraction or anything else right now. We just want to limit the light entering the camera. So learn how to set the "aperture" to f22 (or maybe f16, if that is as far as your lens will allow).
Once you have the camera set to Aperture Priority (it may be called something a little different on Canon cameras), the internal workings of the camera will now calculate an exposure time that will work with the other two settings to result in a proper exposure. Hopefully it will be on the order of a second or more.
Using these techniques will work best if you can find a waterfall in shadow, but there should be some effect with any waterfall that you see. Your results will not be perfect, and they won't perfectly match what you have seen in images here, but it will be a start. If your interest continues, you can build on the new skills you have just developed and carry them further, perhaps with some neutral density filters (or maybe just a circular polarizing filter at first) to extend your capabilities.
Photography should be fun, and it certainly shouldn't detract from the pleasure of your trip to see the waterfalls in the first place.
Give this a try, and see where it takes you.
larryepage wrote:
Good morning. I'm sorry that you have been treated so roughly here in response to your completely valid question. Please understand that most folks here are pretty serious about photography...to the point that the photography and the equipment and the technique take precedence over all else sometimes. A ot of us also tend to be "one trick ponies," who know one way to do a thing and aren't disposed to consider other alternatives.
I do not have a camera like yours, so I'm going to end up referring you to the manual for a couple of things, but I do expect that you can do at least an approximation of the waterfall images you would like to capture without having to take a full semester photography class or going out and buying a boatload of equipment that you might not ever use again. So let's take a stab at it.
First...to smooth the motion of the water, you are going to need to take the longest exposure that you can manage with whatever equipment that you do have or do end up with. That means that the one thing that is not going to be negotiable is that you are going to need a tripod. Now the standard response here is that you need to spend hundreds of dollars for a rock solid tripod that will never move under any conditions, and that's really true. But it's also true that for this first venture, you can probably do with a much more basic one...one that will hold your camera steady for a second or two.
You are also going to need to spend a couple of minutes in your manual and learn how to set your camera for "Aperture Priority," then how to set it for a specific f-stop. You should be able to find those topics in the index. While looking for that, also look for how to set your ISO, which is the camera's sensitivity to light. (ANd make sure that you note how to get back to your automatic settings when you are finished with the waterfall.)
What we want to do is to be able to make your camera as "insensitive" to light as possible. That means setting it to the lowest ISO value possible. I read in an earlier response above that someone familiar with your camera (or at least the manual) indicated that was 100. If so, fine. If there are a couple of "Lo" options available below that, choose the one at the far end of the scale.
Now we want to make the lens pass the least amount of light possible. We don't care about diffraction or anything else right now. We just want to limit the light entering the camera. So learn how to set the "aperture" to f22 (or maybe f16, if that is as far as your lens will allow).
Once you have the camera set to Aperture Priority (it may be called something a little different on Canon cameras), the internal workings of the camera will now calculate an exposure time that will work with the other two settings to result in a proper exposure. Hopefully it will be on the order of a second or more.
Using these techniques will work best if you can find a waterfall in shadow, but there should be some effect with any waterfall that you see. Your results will not be perfect, and they won't perfectly match what you have seen in images here, but it will be a start. If your interest continues, you can build on the new skills you have just developed and carry them further, perhaps with some neutral density filters (or maybe just a circular polarizing filter at first) to extend your capabilities.
Photography should be fun, and it certainly shouldn't detract from the pleasure of your trip to see the waterfalls in the first place.
Give this a try, and see where it takes you.
Good morning. I'm sorry that you have been treate... (
show quote)
I don’t see where he’s the one treated roughly. He asked a question, to which several people took the time to provide good, knowledgeable answers to, and rather than graciously thank people for their help, complained about it all being too much trouble.
This thread needs to stop. I have received enough help to last a lifetime. Thanks to all who took the time to reply. I have fallen onto a sight where people are serious about photography. Photography for me WAS serious...but only shoot pictures on trips once or twice a year now. "Uglyhedgehog" is far more serious than a "once-a-yearer." I will take the knowledge and practice for the trip. Thank you all again. Finding the right budget tripod/ND filter is my next adventure. Thanks again
Travelfan wrote:
This thread needs to stop. I have received enough help to last a lifetime. Thanks to all who took the time to reply. I have fallen onto a sight where people are serious about photography. Photography for me WAS serious...but only shoot pictures on trips once or twice a year now. "Uglyhedgehog" is far more serious than a "once-a-yearer." I will take the knowledge and practice for the trip. Thank you all again. Finding the right budget tripod/ND filter is my next adventure. Thanks again
This thread needs to stop. I have received enough... (
show quote)
Just click 'unwatch' and it will be off your list. This could go on for several more pages.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.