----- Original Message ----- From: "Rob Studdert"
Subject: Re: PESO waterfall ing across film (err... CCD)
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.
This may be where digital's inherent linearity works against it.
William Robb
