Waterfall Pics for C & C

AdeleS

Took a wee trip up to Powerscourt today to attempt taking some waterfall pics... I was quite pleased with the results but unfortunately I haven't invested in a tripod yet so a lot of my pics suffered from blurring. The best ones are on my flickr - link in signature. Thanks all.

DeVore

Very nice! The water effect is excellent, did you use a long exposure for that?

DeV.

AdeleS

Yes.... I used a nifty little mode on my camera called Tv (Shutter Priority) which basically does it all for you

mike65

Am I missing something?

Mike.

AdeleS

Missing? something? please explain

elven

Mike, are you showing signatures? The link to flickr is in there.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/adele2006

There it is anyway...

mike65

Thanks, I have sigs switched off. I'm tired of being asaulted by noisy graphics!

Mike.

Ruu_Old

Nice work indeed. The water on one of the b+w photos kind of looks like a mist of some sort or cobwebs. Thanks for sharing.

rymus

mike65 wrote:

Thanks, I have sigs switched off. I'm tired of being asaulted by noisy graphics!

Mike.

And for that very reason I'd like if you would post at least one of the images to the thread in future. Poor ol' Mike had to go to an awful amount of trouble

AdeleS

Voila!

rymus

splendido.

Fionn

nicely done Adele

AdeleS

Cheers all... comments very much appreciated;)

5uspect

very nice. what lenses do you use? I'm looking for a good macro lens for my 350D. I have the cheap 18-55mm and 55-200mm that came with it but i'd like to get a better quality marcro lens that also good for general stuff.

AdeleS

I was gonna ask someone the same question... so far all my pics have been taken with the kit lens (18-55)... I am pretty pleased with what I can take with it but I would like a good macro lens myself. I have been looking at the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro but something smaller and not so bulky would appeal so if anyone else has any suggestions, feel free.......

Matt Holck

I really liked the detrail of the dandy lion

did you take it handheld?

I used to improvise a tripode using a long carboard roll like one inside wrapping paper
I placed it in a soft leather zip around suitcase full of tools for a weighted base

and tripods <$100

AdeleS

I really liked the detrail of the dandy lion
did you take it handheld?

Yep Matt, all of my shots are hand held.

I used to improvise a tripode using a long carboard roll like one inside wrapping paper
I placed it in a soft leather zip around suitcase full of tools for a weighted base

Hee, hee, amazing what you'll do for the love of photography

Oriel

Am I the only person who doesn't like this?

AdeleS wrote:

I mean, look at the contrast! Maybe it's my monitor (which is a Mac, by the way) but the water is just a blob of white and the top right corner is so dark I can't make anything out.

I mean, ok, use a tripod and a long exposure to get your bog-standard waterfall photo, but this, I feel, is not a good example of such a photo.
The framing could be better too I think. It's too "cramped" or something.

Generally, if I don't like a photo, I don't comment on it - but there were so many comments say how good it is, that I just don't see!


S.

AdeleS

Thank you for your comments sinecurea.... I am a complete beginner at photography so all comments and critique are welcome and I do appreciate people being honest with me because I certainly won't learn otherwise;)

Right now, I am just trying to get used to the camera and the different modes... was my first time trying out a longer exposure even tho I did it the "automatic" way.

the water is just a blob of white

Is that not the result of a longer exposure?

The framing could be better too I think.

Could you elaborate on this?

Thanks again for your comments;)

Oriel

AdeleS wrote:

Is that not the result of a longer exposure?

Not necessarily. You could choose a smaller aperture, thus leaving the shutter time the same, but the image would not be as exposed.

AdeleS wrote:

Could you elaborate on this?

I personally feel that the photo would have perhaps been better had you zoomed out a bit. The water is leading your eye away to somewhere, but at the moment, it's just leading your eye to the frame of the image...

I'm only a beginner myself relatively speaking by the way.

Steve.

AdeleS

Not necessarily. You could choose a smaller aperture, thus leaving the shutter time the same, but the image would not be as exposed.

Point taken... but imo I like the effect of the long exposure on the water giving it a smoother softer effect.

I personally feel that the photo would have perhaps been better had you zoomed out a bit. The water is leading your eye away to somewhere, but at the moment, it's just leading your eye to the frame of the image...

The water was flowing into that rock pool which was surrounded by very large rocks so I really don't think I could have zoomed out any further.

Thanks again for your comments.

Matt Holck

sinecurea wrote:

Not necessarily. You could choose a smaller aperture, thus leaving the shutter time the same, but the image would not be as exposed.

I'm confused

elven

Exposure is controlled by two things - the aperture size, and the shutter speed. It's a balance, and if you increase one, you have to decrease the other to keep the exposure the same. Therefore, you can keep a slower shutter speed, and reduce the size of the aperture (a bigger f number) which will keep the burred effect, but let less light in over the same period of time...

ChityWest

elven wrote:

Exposure is controlled by two things - the aperture size, and the shutter speed. It's a balance, and if you increase one, you have to decrease the other to keep the exposure the same. Therefore, you can keep a slower shutter speed, and reduce the size of the aperture (a bigger f number) which will keep the burred effect, but let less light in over the same period of time...

Nerd.

elven

Damn! I've been rumbled...

(Did I actually sound like I know what I'm on about???)

Oriel

elven wrote:

which will keep the burred effect, but let less light in over the same period of time...

Which will then, in turn, show more detail in the water, while keeping the blur...

AdeleS

Where can I take a course in nerdiness... I wanna be one:p

Oriel

Well, you've come to the right place to learn!

Borderfox

Here's a picture of the waterfall in Glendalough, nice slow shutter speed and small aperture, good blur on it too. Brightened it a bit in PS

AdeleS

Welcome to nerdville borderfox.. lovely pic! Maybe next time I'll get it right

Borderfox

Get yourself a tripod and if you dont have a graduated filter to dull the light wait till it's late in the day to take the picture. I was lucky that was done in one picture not long after I got my eos. I joined nerdville a long time ago but I am on the border now between the land of the nerd and the land of the living!!

Borderfox

exif data is 50mm f22 2.5 seconds iso 100

AdeleS

Cheers foxy;)

Valentia

I have a plan! Next time anyone is taking a pic of a waterfall get on to Roadstone and order a load of sand or gravel. Get them to arrive at the location about ten minutes before the shoot is about to start. Dump the sand or gravel in the river upstream from the waterfall. This will take the whiteness off the flow and turn it grey.

But make sure, and this is the really important bit, that the sand is exactly 18% grey. Expose for the water and your exposure will be 100% accurate! ;)

Borderfox

18% / f22 * 5.02 + 12.5 * 10 = waterfall picture, simple when you see it on paper

AdeleS

Valentia - LOL!!!!

Would I qualify for nerdiness if I did that?:rolleyes:

Matt Holck

The data collected by each diode is recorded through charge build up.
If there is a maximum charge these diodes can collect is exceeded,
any charge beyond that will be lost
and therefor all illuminousity exceeding this threshold will be recorded at the same flat top level.

However if the collected charge is not the threshold problem,
the threshold of the analog to digital conversion may be the problem.

After the charge is collected by the diodes,
that signal is grouped into bins for digital conversion.
These bins are set to collect according the amount of charge.
If this is the case,
there may be an electrical setting in the camera that can proportionally lower the signal from the charge collected before it is recorded by the bins.
This would allow a greater range of luminosities to be recorded
with out flat topping at threshold.

AdeleS

:eek:

Matt Holck

The beach/snow setting might help

Fionn

dang!!!

that reminds me i forgot to put out the bins yesterday

:mad:

AdeleS

Give up the photography Fionn and become a comedian LOL;)

Fionn

all that talk of bins and flat topping - oh boy!