SWFeral Loc: SWNM

Recently someone asked how people like their moving water, and I weighed in, saying something wise like it depended on the scene and what you're trying to convey. Many people made it clear that the smooth, silky (or milky) look is not something they want to see in photos of water. I agree that when water is the main subject, that looks contrived. I have a lot of photos that look like that from when I was first using a tripod and practicing with ISO 100 and Live View and small apertures, trying to act like a professional. (I am too lazy to do that anymore). Under those circumstances the water is going to look silky and white because of the low shutter speed.

I discovered that if moving water is to be blurred, it is best used as a background for something sharp, like branches or autumn leaves or icicles. I especially like blurred water behind icicles because it really sets them off. Likewise a softer water effect can be used to complement a stationary object that is submerged in it.

When the energy and power of rushing water is the subject, I think it is more effective to stop its action. Not only do you get sharp detail in the water itself, you get all its beautiful colors. When photographing moving water I always take several shots of each scene because the water, whether it's captured at a fast or slow shutter speed, creates a different composition in each one.

I've included examples which at least sort of illustrate my points. (Mostly I just liked the photos). I believe the shutter speeds used, from top to bottom, were 1/15, 1/30, and 1/1000. Somewhere I do have photos where I used a tripod and much slower shutter speeds, but I am also too lazy to look those up, and anyway you all know what that looks like.

I hope everyone's doing okay during COVID-19-induced isolation.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Susan yamakawa

Love them 🤗🤗👍👍

Murex Loc: Bainbridge, Georgia

These shots really come alive on download. I like all of them! Particularly #2. I am not a fan of silky water.

Errickcameron

When I set up with a tripod to take falls, brooks, or ocean waves I will take with ow without N f in yes or maybe a variety. I keep 3 different ones in my bag. I will also take multiple shots stopping down. I thus get a multitude of different freezes from pure silk to full detail of the water motion. It is often the “in between” shots that I like most. Many viewers will prefer the silky but I believe that they are often the “non photographers” and they don’t know how to produce the silk in their photos.

SWFeral Loc: SWNM

Thanks for looking. By the time I return to this particular creek (my favorite) it may not have much water in it, depending on our weather. A wet winter does not mean sufficient water during the summer.

SWFeral Loc: SWNM

Thanks. I had a lot of fun with #2. I took some with a faster shutter speed and the effect was not as pleasing.

SWFeral Loc: SWNM

It seems like back in the '70's that silky look became popular, posters of rain forests with white cascading water etc. As I said, I don't think it works when the water is the main subject.

UTMike Loc: South Jordan, UT

Thanks for posting, I am not a fan of silky water, but everyone has an opinion. (My crew says say hey to Ted)

SWFeral Loc: SWNM

Hey back. Ted finds my photography sessions boring.

luvmypets Loc: Born & raised Texan living in Fayetteville NC

Very nice photos!!! I really like #3. I like seeing the splashes and drops flying around.

Dodie

SWFeral Loc: SWNM

Thanks! It's a small but very busy and self-important waterfall, and it puts a lot of effort into what it's doing. I doubt that many people even know of its existence, which makes it more of a treasure.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

Nor am I a silky water fan. That said, you got the first one just right.

RWCRNC Loc: Pennsylvania

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

Nicely done, but I readily admit that the last one is my favorite.

TheShoe Loc: Lacey, WA