Post-Competition Discussion: Long Exposure

[FowlersFreeTime]

Congrats to the winners of last month's competition, themed "Long Exposure".

Did anyone learn anything new from experimenting with long exposure? Were you already a master at it? or did you feel that you were unable to participate due to the nature of the challenge? Let's discuss and please feel free to post examples of photos that you may have taken but did not submit for the competition.

Personally, I limited myself by thinking that the only scene I wanted to shoot for long exposure was a sunrise at the local pier. A nice thought, but daddy duties kept me home or too tired to make the early morning trip. As a result, I never even took a single photo. Perhaps there might have been something closer to home that I could have shot with long exposure technique.

 

[etiennescamera]

Congrats to the winners of last month's competition, themed "Long Exposure".

Did anyone learn anything new from experimenting with long exposure? Were you already a master at it? or did you feel that you were unable to participate due to the nature of the challenge? Let's discuss and please feel free to post examples of photos that you may have taken but did not submit for the competition.

Personally, I limited myself by thinking that the only scene I wanted to shoot for long exposure was a sunrise at the local pier. A nice thought, but daddy duties kept me home or too tired to make the early morning trip. As a result, I never even took a single photo. Perhaps there might have been something closer to home that I could have shot with long exposure technique.

For me the biggest question was: how is long exposure defined? For instance, does this photo of an elephant eating, qualify as long exposure. The exposure time of 1/50s is not particularly long, but in the context of the subject matter may be considered long.

• ILCE-1
• FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM
• 35.0 mm
• ƒ/14
• 1/50 sec
• ISO 160

I ended up not entering it, but rather just stepped out of my house and set up my camera outside my front door to photograph passing cars. The requirement of photos having to have been taken in the competition month or preceding two months limited my options.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

For me the biggest question was: how is long exposure defined? For instance, does this photo of an elephant eating, qualify as long exposure. The exposure time of 1/50s is not particularly long, but in the context of the subject matter may be considered long.

View attachment 58354

I ended up not entering it, but rather just stepped out of my house and set up my camera outside my front door to photograph passing cars. The requirement of photos having to have been taken in the competition month or preceding two months limited my options.

I completely understand your point.
"Long exposure" as a theme evokes different things for different people: motion blur of any sort fits the topic but expectations of dramatically long exposures were equally applicable.

That's a nice photo by the way. Having been to the zoo a few times this year, its always nice to see elephants in wide open spaces or in the wild.

 

[etiennescamera]

Understandable, but the main goal of these competitions is to get people out shooting and to enhance the community. If I had my druthers, it would be limited to the month of the contest, only.

The other side of that coin is that people who have been shooting Sony for decades would have a tremendous catalog from which to draw, while those who are just joining the system would have their options limited. We experienced that regularly under the old rules. Limiting the period puts everyone on an even playing field at the start.

I wouldn't consider 1/50 shutter to be slow in any case. People shoot airplanes at 1/100 +/- to get prop blur. Is that a slow shutter speed based on the subject? However, I do agree that parameters in the rules would've been helpful.

Not saying that I disagree with the rules, since entering a competition implies that one accepts the rules as they stand, simply stating that, due to my specific work situation, I have times during the year when I can spend a lot of time on photography, but then go through periods or 3-4 months at a time where I hardly get to even look at my camera. I thus end up with otherwise suitable photos, but which are 1 or 2 months too old for the competition rules.

 

[etiennescamera]

I completely understand your point.
"Long exposure" as a theme evokes different things for different people: motion blur of any sort fits the topic but expectations of dramatically long exposures were equally applicable.

That's a nice photo by the way. Having been to the zoo a few times this year, its always nice to see elephants in wide open spaces or in the wild.

Thanks, I am in the lucky position of being able to see elephants in the wild less than 50km from my home and always find them interesting photographic subjects, although this particular photo was taken a bit further afield.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

In my case I didn't enter last month even though I had a shot planned, because I'm too lazy.

We all go through the same types of periods. It's to be expected that not everyone can enter every month.

Well, you were also getting your eyes lasered, so you had a good excuse

 

[iamdlewis]

For me I really need to look at a few months of themes so that I am not trying to find a good idea and squeeze it into the self-inflicted shorter timeframe. It wasn't that I didn't make an attempt it was more that I wasn't happy with any of my attempts that I did have time to act on.

 

[Unframed Dave]

I didn't participate last month, I spent most of it on the sofa after having keyhole surgery. Pretty well mended now though.

 

[Unframed Dave]

Wait...for what? In your skull?

Nah, elective gall bladder removal. Been on the waiting list 4 years, 3 previous cancellations. Last cancellation was at five to five on the day of the op, I'd been on the ward since 0730 and nothing to eat since 0600.

 

[Unframed Dave]

PHEW! Hopefully everything's ok!

Seems OK, ta. Looking forward to cutting some firewood for next winter now, 6 weeks idle has left me a bit flabby

 

[Landshark99]

I did not shoot anything this month with long exposures as the subject. If I am honest some subject ideas are more inspiring than others to me at the moment and this one just was not.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

I did not shoot anything this month with long exposures as the subject. If I am honest some subject ideas are more inspiring than others to me at the moment and this one just was not.

That's fair. I think if the subject was bird photography, for example, I would be hesitant to enter.

 

[Richard A]

For me the biggest question was: how is long exposure defined? For instance, does this photo of an elephant eating, qualify as long exposure. The exposure time of 1/50s is not particularly long, but in the context of the subject matter may be considered long.

I reckon if you have blurred action in you photo, which you have, that's good enough for long exposure.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

1/200, blur. Long exposure?

DSC02984 by Shotglass Photo, on Flickr

Hmmm, point taken.
So what is the threshold for calling a slow shutter speed "long exposure"? Anything slower than 1/2 second? a second?

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

Most websites I have googled, they dance around the definition and say "below X" like this excerpt from Adobe:

Long exposure photography - Adobe

See how adjusting your shutter for long exposure photography can transform distant stars into glowing light trails, add speed to driving cars, and more.

www.adobe.com

The average photo is taken in about 1/60 of a second. But by changing the shutter speed, and leaving the shutter of your camera open for longer, you can collect more light and capture something new.

Some say slower than 1/30, some say slower than you can shoot handheld. The point is, its up to interpretation. The essence of that interpretation seems to be making an image where the blur of movement contrasts with other static elements in the composition.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

Don’t disagree, but if I see an image in a contest for long exposure and the image was made at 1/200, it’s not getting my vote regardless of the image quality. That shot is panning, not long exposure.

So maybe I could refine my homebrew definition of Long Exposure to be:
"The use of an exposure time, longer than normally possible handheld, to exaggerate/highlight the contrast between static subjects and objects in motion."
That would rule out panning techniques, intentional camera motion, or your average blurry image.

EDIT: of course, that would rule out the milkyway exposure by DaveC (but I guess that has its own genre: Astrophotography), and would more favor the winning image by PC45 or even Rhinodad's rocket launch.

 

[etiennescamera]

Well, that’s the point. One person thinks motion blur qualifies, another thinks it is based on shutter speed, etc.. Without guidelines it’s open to interpretation.

I have always considered long exposure to be defined as something that you can’t shoot handheld. Even that isn’t as clear these days with stabilization. What we couldn’t do back then is no longer an issue. But if the image is clearly something that can be handheld, like my dragster shot, then I don’t think it qualifies. I would’ve never considered entering a shot like that, date it was made aside.

If you use “handheld” as criterion, then focal length also has to be considered. My elephant shot was handheld because I was close enough to use 35mm. Had I been far away and shooting at 600mm then 1/50s handheld would not have been possible.

 

[etiennescamera]

So maybe I could refine my homebrew definition of Long Exposure to be:
"The use of an exposure time, longer than normally possible handheld, to exaggerate/highlight the contrast between static subjects and objects in motion."
That would rule out panning techniques, intentional camera motion, or your average blurry image.

EDIT: of course, that would rule out the milkyway exposure by DaveC (but I guess that has its own genre: Astrophotography), and would more favor the winning image by PC45 or even Rhinodad's rocket launch.

If you use “handheld” as criterion, then focal length also has to be considered. My elephant shot was handheld because I was close enough to use 35mm. Had I been far away and shooting at 600mm then 1/50s handheld would not have been possible.

A possible alternative definition: Use of an exposure time long enough to blur subject motion while keeping static objects sharp. This would also rule out panning shots which aim to achieve the opposite.

 

[Landshark99]

One could have a 1 sec or longer exposure without any blur. Way back we used to do light painting that exposure could be a few minutes with no blur.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

One could have a 1 sec or longer exposure without any blur. Way back we used to do light painting that exposure could be a few minutes with no blur.

I almost experimented with light painting when it became apparent I wasn't going to get my long exposure beach day, but it was too late in the month with the deadline for entry looming.

 

[Richard A]

1/200, blur. Long exposure?

DSC02984 by Shotglass Photo, on Flickr

It's taken me a while to reply but here goes (and this is just my opinion) - in the photo of the elephant pulling up the grass with it's trunk, it's the main subject, or part of it, that is blurred and elephants generally not being very fast moving animals. For me, panning is different. It is the camera that is moving in an attempt to blur the background and keep the subject relatively sharp except for moving parts like wheels. In your photo of the dragster, the shutter speed has been too fast to blur the wheels or the background more than a minimal amount, especially considering how fast these things can go.

After being in a camera club for over 20 years (I am not a member now) with monthly competitions and an end of year exhibition, it was always left up to the judges to interpret the theme of the competition.

 

[etiennescamera]

Excellent point, the focal length changes things. But I don't know that that 600mm @ 1/50 is not possible when one considers IS. If we have 4 real stops of IS, then 600>300>150>75>37.5. This is going to be dependent on the individual of course, and makes things more difficult, but it's not impossible.

This is an enjoyable discussion!

Then there is obviously also the minor issue of the weight of the 600mm lens when shooting handheld. Perhaps we need a separate section on the forum for weight training advice for those who want to shoot handheld with these long lenses

 

[Richard A]

Sometimes I shoot these at 1/100 or 1/160, but in this case I chose a photo with the faster shutter speed to make a point that your comment about 'blur' being is not the sole descriptor.

You may be interested to know that the photo was made from 35' away and is virtually uncropped except for composition, the car got slightly ahead of me in the frame and I had to take some off the back. So, while you jumped on the technique (which BTW is not the topic of this thread, sorry you couldn't resist the urge), yes they are fast. Very fast. Try panning on something that close, going that fast, and is that large, while filling the frame. I don't stand way back to take an easy photo, crop the holy crap out of it, and then post it for Ooh's and Ah's.

I don't think I jumped on anything! I wasn't having a go at your photo or your technique. Just giving my opinion on the difference between blur from a moving camera while panning and a moving subject while the camera is kept still.

I have some experience of shooting racing cars on the old Adelaide Formula 1 Grand Prix track (among other places) from closer than that and panning at higher shutter speeds.

Just because I have only been on this forum for a few months doesn't mean I have only been taking photos for a few months. If you can't handle that then that is your problem. It's not a good way of welcoming new members...

 

[Tim Mayo]

I didn't participate last month, I spent most of it on the sofa after having keyhole surgery. Pretty well mended now though.

I hope you make a speedy recovery Dave!

 

[Tim Mayo]

Then there is obviously also the minor issue of the weight of the 600mm lens when shooting handheld. Perhaps we need a separate section on the forum for weight training advice for those who want to shoot handheld with these long lenses

Or just get the new Sigma 500 F5.6 instead I'm still surprised how light it is when I pick it up.

 

[etiennescamera]

Or just get the new Sigma 500 F5.6 instead I'm still surprised how light it is when I pick it up.

My wife just noticed me looking at this lens and told me in no uncertain terms that I don't need it, since I already blew my whole camera budget for the next decade on a 600mm f4 , so I guess it's off to the gym for me...

 

[Unframed Dave]

I hope you make a speedy recovery Dave!

Thank you Tim, I spent a couple of hours on the chainsaw and splitter this morning. Must be on the mend.