A discussion forum - and more - for users of Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras.
Ebor falls comparison - slow vs fast shutterModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
7 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Ebor falls comparison - slow vs fast shutter
Finally had a play with slower shutter speeds at Ebor Falls, halfway between Coffs Harbour and Armidale. Nice spot, with choice of the upper falls (these pics) and lower falls. The upper falls are fairly short, but close to the viewing platform. The lower falls are a higher drop, but much further from their viewing platform.
These two pics are pretty much of the same area and the same settings, except I varied the shutter speed. The more observant of you are wondering why I didn't change the aperture or sensitivity to give the same exposure. The answer is because the slower pic looked overexposed. Or it could be because I just missed it. One of those. 
Kit lens, f/29, ISO200, 70mm & 1/50 sec (293kB) Kit lens, f/29, ISO200, 70mm & 1/15 sec (253kB) Which one do you prefer, and why? Dopeler Effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
Hi Skippy,
Out of the two I prefer the second, I've always been a sucker for slow shutter speed with water, but the burned out part in the middle bothers me a bit, my eye keeps going to that part all the time. I think a little less exposure would have done it. Nice shots. __________
Phillip **Nikon D7000**
No 2 Skippy - again slow shutter speed with water gives a softer effect. I also like the other end of the spectrum with very fast shutter speed and FP high speed flash.
Chris Chris
-------------------------------- I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
Good to have agreement with what I was thinking! Shame about that blowout; maybe I can PP it out. Maybe.
Dopeler Effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
No. 2 for me. And the use of an ND filter and longer exposure
It's a lovely place though, maybe a little wider on the lens too (but that's because I want to see more of it  )
Cheers Brett
It's not all that far from you Brett - go for a quick spin! Can't take more than 4 or 5 hours or so...
Hadn't even thought of a ND filter. Would have given me more scope for slowing the shutter speed, but two probs with it. Firstly, this was handheld and propped against a rail, so I wouldn't want to slow it down too much. Secondly, I need to talk to Birdy about a filter Dopeler Effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
Previous topic • Next topic
7 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|
