Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => Landscape Showcase => Topic started by: antongorlin on August 31, 2017, 10:57:49 pm
-
Sometimes I look at the classic paintings and ask myself why is long exposure more popular than the shorter one? And I often try to capture the water in all it's beauty and dynamics and energy with as short exposure as reasonably possible.
Maroubra Beach, NSW, Sydney, Australia
(https://antongorlin.com/wp-content/gallery/ocean-pictures/maroubra-beach-flowing-water-sunrise.jpg)
-
That's a very lovely shot, and it makes a good case for shortish exposures.
-
Agreed. Perfect.
-
First rate.
-
Sometimes I look at the classic paintings and ask myself why is long exposure more popular than the shorter one? And I often try to capture the water in all it's beauty and dynamics and energy with as short exposure as reasonably possible.
There are some scenes where a very short exposure, freezing the water, is best; there are others in which a very long exposure, reducing the water to a hazy sheen, works best; and there are others where a moderate exposure works well. There are no absolutes. The exposure you have used here gives a very lovely result, but I don't see any virtue in "as short exposure as possible".
Jeremy
-
Excellent image. I generally prefer shortish exposures in the 1 - 4s range for showing the energy of the sea rather than the super smooth look.
-
This one really works. Great image.
-
fantastic sense of motion in this image, and that light is wonderful
-
Excellent image. I generally prefer shortish exposures in the 1 - 4s range for showing the energy of the sea rather than the super smooth look.
+1
Thierry
-
Not trying to be argumentative, but you could have taken this with 1/250 or such. That is what I thought you were talking about. Then I looked at the image. I wouldn't call this a "shortish" exposure.
Brad
-
thanks for the feedback guys!
but you could have taken this with 1/250 or such
100% true. That's why I wrote "reasonable" because wide angle + very short exposure makes a messy shot.
There are some scenes where a very short exposure, freezing the water, is best; there are others in which a very long exposure, reducing the water to a hazy sheen, works best; and there are others where a moderate exposure works well. There are no absolutes. The exposure you have used here gives a very lovely result, but I don't see any virtue in "as short exposure as possible".
Agree. But I feel that shorter exposure is undervalued.
Excellent image. I generally prefer shortish exposures in the 1 - 4s range for showing the energy of the sea rather than the super smooth look.
+1
-
Very good photo.