2 29 16





23 responses to “2 29 16

    • I need to invest in some ND filters for the slow speeds I am hoping to get. I have only a polarizing filter which, by itself, doesn’t do the trick. Some or the parks (like this one) are closed after dark or aren’t safe after dark and that also limits the time I can shoot. It’s a challenge but I’m eager to try it.

      • Disclaimer: I ain’t no guru. The following is not meant as an argumentative counter to the above. Just sharing my experience and understanding, erroneous as it is, of the subject.

        Hmm . . . I’ve used that technique to slow water without using any filters, but in my experience it’s very limited (and limiting).

        This shot:

        is at f/22 and 1/10 sec. ISO 100, but realize the scene had little light. The brighter the scene the more limited you will be in slowing the shutter.

        Also, there is a vast difference between using a ND filter and messing with the aperture.

        Invariably, when I do that, I end up with an underexposed photo which I then have to “crank” back up. As I understand it, by using ND filters you’re not having to post-process for underexposure (you still have to calculate equivalent f/stops and speeds, but the speeds are in terms of multiple seconds or minutes).

        Also, you’re limited to just how much motion you can capture, even at 1/10. Fine for flowing water, less fine for gently swaying trees, or waves rolling in. It’s the difference between a slight blur and that artsy effect where everything moving smooths out and turns to a mystical fog.


        BTW, capturing motion can also be done by setting the camera on multiple exposures (again, tripod), or by actually taking multiple photos and blending them.

        Also, if you have two circular polarizers, you can approximate the effect of ND filters by adjusting them relative to each other (adjustable ND filters are essentially two polarizing filters stacked together). However, polarizers are not the same as ND filter (neutral being the key word) Polarizers intensify certain colors even as they reduce the amount of light coming through.

        FYI, I plan to get me a set of ND filters, but right now I have minimal use for it. That will change, probably this year.

        • All good points, E. My interest in the ND filters is to achieve a silky smooth lake water on a lake where the water is almost always in constant motion. The other shots I would like to take are in a grove of trees that seem to be in the same constant motion as the lake. I can see what I want in my minds eye but that’s of little use to anyone else. I probably wouldn’t get the top of the line ND filters since I don’t intend to get much use from them, at least in the foreseeable future. And at this point I’m not concerned about the effects of the polarizers on colors, either. Outside my Museum work, I don’t try to be as color corrected as probably other photographers might be. Besides, there are so many software tweaks that correct for color it’s not worth my effort to try to get the most accurate in-camera image, especially shooting RAW. The camera has a bracket feature I intend to use as well even though it seems to do a fine job of calculating exposures in dim light or through filters. If I had to put groceries on the table with my shots I probably would be a little more conscientious about it. I’m glad we had this conversation because there isn’t anyone interested in the technical end of photography I can talk to around here very often and I can do this all day.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s