• 0
  • -1
Kyle Foreman's picture

Long exposure or No

Just wondering what people prefer when shooting waterfalls like this. I typically prefer longer exposures but with a water fall this big I think the normal exposure looks better. You can see more of the texture of the water and I think you get a better feel for the power of the water in the normal exposure. The long exposure does look nice too though. Thoughts?

Log in or register to post comments
12 Comments

I think that the first frame is better, but perhaps it is too static.
Try blending the two together in Photoshop to see what gets spat out. With luck you may get the good aspects of both.

I think the really long exposure thing has really been done to death lately (not speaking specifically of yours.) Usually, I like a very short (1/500 or faster) exposure. Sometimes I use a somewhat longer (1/2 to 1/10 second) that still provides some texture while adding a level of abstraction. .

The second with the blurred water looks a little too contrived next to the building. The first is better

Not a fan of the blur trend, it is artistic but looks too fake for my taste. Natural appeals more to me, Arthur makes a good point, perhaps experiment on exposure until you have a blend of the natural while still conveying the feeling i.e. Movement, you are trying to capture.

I agree with Mike, in that when a waterfall is blurred, to my mind, it takes away some of the power. Granted, a blurred waterfall is pretty and can be calming, but for me, when I think of a waterfall, particularly, if it's a good sized one, I think of power. I think blending the two would bring back some of the power. It also depends on what you want to convey, peace or power. IMHO.

I disagree with the various comments - sometimes it's better to shoot short exposure, sometimes long, depends on what you're trying to show. Long exposures are peaceful, dreamy; short ones show power, violence. The only method that appears not to work very well is mixing both short and long in post-process. Even that might have some use somewhere. Here's a piece of Victoria Falls...

Agreed - for me, there’s no one size fits all approach when it comes to waterfalls. Sometimes I’ll blend a slower and faster shutter speeds I.E. beach scenes where I blend a shot of waves hitting the rocks (slower) and water running off the rocks (faster, but still a little slower than normal)

post an example of a blended scene? show me I wasn't completely dumb...

I think you misunderstood. I was agreeing with you wholeheartedly and think your shot of Victoria Falls is a great example.

gotcha.

Depends on the scene and for this one, I prefer the normal exposure for the waterfall, possibly because it complements all of the textures in the scene. I really like your shot and the only change I would try, is to shoot multiples for the river, then blend them so that there are no white rapids / waves. Just a matter of preference here though and great images either way.

If it wasn't such a powerful water fall I think blur would look good, but thats not the case in this photo. I think the scene is better represented in the first photo