Water: long or short exposure?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
akustykmagmanetpl Senior Member • Posts: 1,295
short exposure, with some WB adjustment

personally, I'm quite bored with the mindless abuse of ND1000 filters that got so common in the last 5 years.

both are good photos, but normal exposure has higher impact because it retains the natural drama of the scene (water and clouds) which ND1000 steamrolls by smoothing out those harsh edges that this scenery requires.

sidenote: I think it could be a little colder WB with (at least on my screen) some push to magenta (water but especially clouds could use a little more pinkish cast).

other than that: beautiful scene, lovely conditions and neatly composed. well done!

Which one do you like the most (if any)?

0.6s and 30s exposures respectively. The second one is taken closer to the blue hour and it would be difficult to actually make it shorter.

This thread is more to discuss your preferable approach to capturing the water movement, but CC is welcome and will be appreciated.

Cathedral Rocks

Cathedral Rocks

 akustykmagmanetpl's gear list:akustykmagmanetpl's gear list
Canon EOS 10D Canon EOS 70D Canon 6D Mark II Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow