Running water looks like cencentrated milk

[gerard_taillefer]

I take pictures of trees, forests, clearings, rivers, streamlets... A

couple of years ago, I would take these pictures with a hand-held

Nikon and ISO 400 film, seldom with a tripod. To-day I have moved to

4.5x6 and 6x9 cm, ISO 100 film and tripod. Most of my pictures need

f/16-f/32 for the right DOF and this means of course long exposure

times (around 1 second is not unusual).

 

One problem with such long exposure times is that running water often

looks very very unnatural in the resulting photograph. In an

otherwise sharp setting � �sharp from here to infinity� � streamlets,

cascades etc will look like concentrated milk or whipped cream.

 

I cannot remember having read about a solution to this problem. I

guess it�s as simple as using a much shorter exposure time but I�d

like to hear from you people with the same experience.

[cgo]

Your slow shutter speed is not stopping the action in the stream. A higher sutter speed with less DOF or with a higher speed film will increase the probability of achieving what you seek.

[wim_van_velzen]

You are right that the milk like rivers are a bit weird. On the other hand are frozen waterfalls @ 1/250 unnatural too. The best is to do a couple of exposures, with e.g. 1/8, 1/30 and 1/125. Afterwards you can choose what works best.

 

For me depth-of-field is not the most important thing here, but I (learnt to?) appreciate the milkness. But I agree:1 sec can be a bit too much.

[kevinconnery]

Another approach is to do multiple exposures at a shorter speed. That doesn't <i>smear</i> the water as much as a very long exposure would--there's more highlights glinting that still show up--without the frozen look a single fast shutter speed would.<p>

 

If, for example, you needed 1 second at f22, shoot 4 exposures at 1/4, or 8 at 1/8th, etc. <p>

 

As with other such experiments, experimentation is the key. I've never done this, but a buddy of mine swears by it, and his water looks fairly reasonable to me.

[john_sonewald]

The "FotoSharp" reference card for "Photographong Water" suggests the following:

 

Desired Appearance = Blurred; 1/15 to 1/125 (use the faster speeds for larger streams/rivers).

 

Desired Appearance = Silky; 1 sec. to 1/2 (also faster speeds for larger streams/rivers).

[wim_van_velzen]

John, shouldn't that be 'faster speeds for faster streams'? In my experience the small burns tend to be streaming faster than larger rivers, so for the same effect as with a larger more quiet river you should use for the burn say 1/125 in stead of 1/30.

[gerard_taillefer]

Sorry, Kevin, but double exposure is impossible with my Fuji MF cameras.

 

John, if I would like to take a picture of a stream at let say f/22 (for the DOF) and experiment with exposure times of 1/15 to 1/125 for the best visualisation of the running water, then I should try 4 different ISO emulsions, like ISO 100 for 1/15 sec, ISO 200 for 1/30, ISO 400 for 1/60 and ISO 800 for 1/125 sec.

 

It might work, of course...

[gary voth]

Make two exposures: one long, one short. Scan the film. Composite in Photoshop. Output to film/print/Web.