Really long exposure times...

DeVore

Look, I never could work this out and I finally twigged some things (the fireworks really made me study this thing for once), so I thought I'd explain this for those of us still figuring out which way to point this thing.

Its midnight and I live in the suburbs and its cloudy so its fairly dark outside despite the full moon.

I just snapped this:


What kind of satanic voodoo are they pulling these days in these cameras?? I couldnt see diddly out my back yard and it snapped that?!

Here's how for Canon folk:

I put my camera on the M setting. I used the wheel to change the length of time it will open the aperture for.
It starts at something like 1/250 of a second and then goes to 1 second then 2,4, etc... some will stop at 30 seconds which is loads to be fair (that picture was taken at about 4 seconds or so).

I set my ISO to 1600 (hold the ISO button and use the directional arrows) and used a tripod because no one could hold the camera still enough for 4 seconds.

Now, I will admit to having used a remote switch because I'm playing with something called BULB which if you keep scrolling most cameras will have (right after 30 seconds on my 550d). Bulb lets you decide yourself how long you want and is for reaaaally long exposures. You push the button to start and push it again to stop. Doing that will jar the camera I figured so I bought a remote. Its awesome.

This trick is handy for places with low light and little movement if you want to brighten it up. OR... a little movement you want to capture as blur (think about those shots of water that look like smokey ethereal fog).

Anyway, there you go. Midnight in full daylight!

DeV.

the_syco

Google light painting - it's super fun

challengemaster

Dev, if you're using a tripod you don't need to compensate with the ISO. Think of the exposure triangle



If you increase the ISO, you increase noise. Generally you'd do this when you don't have a tripod and want to capture low-light images, as you're limited by what shutter speed and aperture you can use handheld without getting blur.

With a tripod, you don't have to worry about motion blur when you lower your shutter speed, so increasing ISO only generates unwanted noise in the photo.

Also, you should be using a remote release with long exposures, not just bulb mode, as if you actually press the button, you do cause the camera to move slightly, which can affect the result. This can be further reduced by using the mirror lock-up function on the camera (if it has it), which on the first shutter press, the mirror moves out of the way, and on second press, it takes the photo. This is because in some cases the mirror moving in the camera can actually cause enough vibrations to alter the end result

Have fun putting this into practice

MrJoeSoap

Took this one in almost complete darkness last year, the first time I'd taken a long exposure at night. Was stunned at how well it turned out so started getting into timelapse photography. Here's one of my earlier timelapses (very basic stuff!), I couldn't believe how many stars the camera picked up that the naked eye couldn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFk4Wnmn0qc

Then went on to make this one after a few months. A lot of it is daytime, but some at the end is long exposure night shots:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXy4x1Ma2gs

MrJoeSoap

These ones were in near total darkness but for the stars and moon, on a rural island off the north-west coast of France

the_syco wrote: »

Google light painting - it's super fun

"Groix"

the_syco

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/383893_2807290025174_1346377844_3136018_317721949_n.jpg

Wow! I'm really loving this one. Trying to replicate something like this, but unfortunately I only really get to shoot the sky when doing at a mates in Galway where there's very little light pollution, and I can see the milkyway with ease. At home here in Leixlip, there's usually too much light pollution to do any shots of the sky, but must try to get into it taking night shots again

DaireQuinlan

ACTUAL really long exposures:

http://www.unfinishedman.com/the-long-exposures-of-michael-wesely/

3 years in once instance

McVitae

Funny thing about moonlight is that it reflects almost the entire spectrum of sunlight. SO if you keep the shutter open long enough your scene should look likes its lit my sunlight without the addition of the blue sky. I think !!

magicbastarder

i once did a ten minute exposure, but i had to stop when the police were called.

ronanc15

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

ACTUAL really long exposures:

http://www.unfinishedman.com/the-long-exposures-of-michael-wesely/

3 years in once instance

Some really interesting shots in that, the room where it looks haunted is cool!

Kenny Logins

I have been treated with regular updates from Michael Bosanko on another (not photography related) forum I frequent, since long before I ever owned a DSLR. Over the last few years he has shared some really amazing pictures, and shown what is possible when combining long exposures with imagination.

Have a look - http://www.michaelbosanko.com/

melekalikimaka

get some stencils and a flash for some real fun


Light Stencil Trials Blackrock Beach by melekalikimaka, on Flickr

magicbastarder

one of the side effects of using the pinhole camera when shooting beside a road is that some motorists slow down, i assume they think it's a speed camera.

DeVore

MrJoeSoap, that video was made by compiling lots of long exposures of the same scene into a video or what? You seem to have gotten motion without the motion blur I would have expected....

Thaks for the tips guys and gals, been having fun playing and learning before my trip to make the most of it!

DeV.

MrJoeSoap

DeVore wrote: »

MrJoeSoap, that video was made by compiling lots of long exposures of the same scene into a video or what? You seem to have gotten motion without the motion blur I would have expected....

It's thousands of different exposures piled together into 24-frame-per-second video. The exposure times varied depending on the scene itself. I used one of these intervalometer things to schedule the photo's. The camera I'm using is a 500D.

For the daytime cloud and sky scenes, for example, it could be a brief exposure of 1/160 every 5 seconds. That would mean that one second of video (24 frames) would be the equivalent of 2 minutes in real time (24f x 5secs = 120secs or 2mins).

But then for the nighttime star scenes at the end (taken in Valentia, Co. Kerry where there is little light polution) they would be longer exposures of 30 seconds taken every 35 seconds, so for every 1 second of video it would take 14 minutes (24f x 35secs = 840secs or 14 mins). Notice how quickly the airplane crosses the scene at 2:55 in the video, in reality that probably took a minute or two to cross the frame.

I reckon that in the second video I posted above, there were probably around 4500 photo's.