Unnatural water (Page 2): I agree that those blurred water photos have become a cliche. But I don't agree that the only or best use of photography is to show the world as close to the...

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

gvarner wrote:

I generally don't like to see silky water pics using an ND filter. I prefer natural nature with spray and ripples and chaos in the flow. Perhaps most stream environments are too dark and freezing spray with a high shutter speed is not an option could explain why the ND option is so popular. If the distances aren't too great, a flash would certainly help.

I agree that those blurred water photos have become a cliche. But I don't agree that the only or best use of photography is to show the world as close to the way the eye sees it as possible. Throughout the history of photography, photographers have experimented with how the camera can see the world differently than the eye.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

I think the big problem is that it's being over-used, to the point that it now comes across as unimaginative and gimmicky. Whenever I encounter a photographer's portfolio that is mostly made up of slow shutter moving water images, I lose interest quickly. I'm simply not impressed at all.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

gvarner wrote:

I generally don't like to see silky water pics using an ND filter. I prefer natural nature with spray and ripples and chaos in the flow. Perhaps most stream environments are too dark and freezing spray with a high shutter speed is not an option could explain why the ND option is so popular. If the distances aren't too great, a flash would certainly help.

There's a certain mystery to these pictures. Like, what's upstream, a waste water treatment plant, someone emptying a washing machine, or a bathtub, or ... ?

paulrph1 Loc: Washington, Utah

gvarner wrote:

I generally don't like to see silky water pics using an ND filter. I prefer natural nature with spray and ripples and chaos in the flow. Perhaps most stream environments are too dark and freezing spray with a high shutter speed is not an option could explain why the ND option is so popular. If the distances aren't too great, a flash would certainly help.

What I think here is we have is a failure to communicate. Many will jump on the bandwagon in order to be in vogue. No one has ever, at least that I know of, indicated otherwise so they being said everyone thinks it is normal.

DerBiermeister Loc: North of Richmond VA

As I mentioned in one of my posts above -- the REAL challenge is to capture water as it really looks, especially in a blow. There is a similar challenge for artists who paint ship's scenes in oil -- e.g., those beautiful full-rigged ships and/or clipper ships. Very few can get it right.

n3eg Loc: West coast USA

gvarner wrote:

Unnatural water

I generally don't like to see silky water pics using an ND filter. I prefer natural nature with spray and ripples and chaos in the flow. Perhaps most stream environments are too dark and freezing spray with a high shutter speed is not an option could explain why the ND option is so popular. If the distances aren't too great, a flash would certainly help.

I thought this was going to be about water photography in Flint, Michigan.

In any case, I've actually seen selfies of people sitting still next to long exposure waterfalls. That is more than ridiculous.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

gvarner wrote:

I generally don't like to see silky water pics using an ND filter. I prefer natural nature with spray and ripples and chaos in the flow. Perhaps most stream environments are too dark and freezing spray with a high shutter speed is not an option could explain why the ND option is so popular. If the distances aren't too great, a flash would certainly help.

You also don't see out of focus background blur the way its portrayed when shooting wide open. Do you shoot everything at f/11 so the entire photo is in focus? Do you not appreciate B&W photography because we see in color? Do you dislike images with film grain, or those from fisheye lenses, or with CPL's, since none of these things will give you "natural nature" results. Blurring water is just another technique that creates an interesting effect to set a specific mood. Since very little of photography provides results that are actually natural, its all about interpretation. Its technique, along with the understanding of composition and light, that differentiates photographers from those taking weekend family snapshots.

lowkick Loc: Connecticut

n3eg wrote:

I thought this was going to be about water photography in Flint, Michigan.

In any case, I've actually seen selfies of people sitting still next to long exposure waterfalls. That is more than ridiculous.

When I saw the title, "Unnatural Water", I was afraid it might have something to do with water flowing in my toilet. :oops:

Huey Driver Loc: Texas

That's more like it. Nice pic!

DerBiermeister wrote:

I concur. And having spent a good part of my life... (show quote)

Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.

lowkick wrote:

When I saw the title, "Unnatural Water", I was afraid it might have something to do with water flowing in my toilet. :oops:

Or the water problems their having in Flint Michigan.

John N Loc: HP14 3QF Stokenchurch, UK

For me I like to get blurred water, particularly if it's a waterfall or other fast moving water feature. When the water is 'frozen' it's showing a moment in time, and that's not how we see it. Maybe somewhere in the middle, not blurred, but not pin sharp either.

Ron 717 Loc: Pennsylvania

gvarner wrote:

I generally don't like to see silky water pics using an ND filter. I prefer natural nature with spray and ripples and chaos in the flow. Perhaps most stream environments are too dark and freezing spray with a high shutter speed is not an option could explain why the ND option is so popular. If the distances aren't too great, a flash would certainly help.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. With photography as with all pursuits, it is what you personally feel is beautiful, it is what makes you happy. Unless you are trying to appeal to a buying public, then take the photographs that make you happy and that you enjoy looking at and admiring.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

gvarner wrote:

I generally don't like to see silky water pics using an ND filter. I prefer natural nature with spray and ripples and chaos in the flow. Perhaps most stream environments are too dark and freezing spray with a high shutter speed is not an option could explain why the ND option is so popular. If the distances aren't too great, a flash would certainly help.

It gives a nice effect that 's a departure from reality.

Capn_Dave

And that friends is why photography is an art

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Capn_Dave wrote:

And that friends is why photography is an art

Be careful. You'll start to get a bunch of responses claiming it isn't.