On 3 Feb 2005 at 0:13, Francis wrote: > Hi > I dropped by a local waterfall today and was experimenting with the long > exposure setting on my family's new digital p&s. It goes down to 4sec, > which is 3sec longer than my SLR (one of my main gripes about the P3n), but > the > aperture doesn't close very far so I was holding a lens from my dismembered > sunglasses in front of it. By the time I had hiked in I only had fifteen > minutes > to actually take pictures but here is what I got. > > http://www.photosynth.ca/photo/f/waterfalls.html > > Brutal critiques appreciated.
Hi Francis, Your use of the dismembered sun-glasses was a good use of available resources and seemed to produce the effect you desired however I'm not sure that they would have been the optimum solution :-) Just a few comments on the slow shutter technique. For this to work at the most basic level you really have to be able to record the subtleties of tone in the flowing water that you have blurred. In the first and last images of the sequence in particular there are areas of interest that are patently burnt out or lack detail. I suspect that your new digital p&s may be part of your problem here, they generally have no where near the brightness capture latitude of a decent DSLR or good film. If you are interested in pursuing this type of photography and if you can't open the P3n for longer than 1sec maybe you should hunt down a cheap mechanical body (and maybe a decent ND filter or two) that will allow cable release controlled time exposures. My guess is that you'd end up producing far better shots technically with a little experimentation and little cash outlay. FWIW #4 is my favourite of the set. #2 seems to be a broken link. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
