One long or many exposures??

Pier Study No. 1

A
Pier Study No. 1

  • 2
  • 0
  • 31
Untitled

A
Untitled

  • 0
  • 0
  • 64
Cypress Knees, Sloughs WMA

A
Cypress Knees, Sloughs WMA

  • 0
  • 0
  • 104
Monticello Avenue-3

A
Monticello Avenue-3

  • 0
  • 0
  • 87
surprise!

A
surprise!

  • Tel
  • Feb 7, 2023
  • 3
  • 3
  • 195

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
182,053
Messages
2,519,409
Members
95,487
Latest member
coralluxurycleaning
Recent bookmarks
0

BWGirl

Member
Joined
May 15, 2004
Messages
3,049
Location
Wisconsin, U
Shooter
Multi Format
Hi!
I noticed, Leon, that you did some sort of multiple exposure for your waterfall pictures. You attributed this technique to Les, if I am not mistaken. So if either of you or anyone else who understands this technique could help me out, I'd really appreciate it! :D

Here are my questions....why did you do multiple exposures? What is this method (ie..how do you do it)? Is there a time when this method is better than a single long exposure?

Thanks in advance, oh great masters!
signed "Grasshopper"
 

Jim Moore

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2003
Messages
952
Location
Iowa
Shooter
Large Format
Take a look at this thread. It will explain everything :wink:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Jim
 
OP
OP

BWGirl

Member
Joined
May 15, 2004
Messages
3,049
Location
Wisconsin, U
Shooter
Multi Format
Thanks, Jim!! It certainly does!
Jeanette
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
22,355
Location
West Midland
Shooter
Multi Format
BWGirl said:
Hi!
I noticed, Leon, that you did some sort of multiple exposure for your waterfall pictures. You attributed this technique to Les, if I am not mistaken.
signed "Grasshopper"

Actually this technique of fragmented exposures is excellent when used carefully.

It can be seen at it's best in the work of John Blakemore who devised the method for his landscapes in the late 1970's.

See:
http://photography.about.com/library/dop/bldop_jblake.htm
http://www.hoopersgallery.co.uk/exhibition.htm

Les is merely describing the techniques he picked up from John himself.
 

bjorke

Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
2,071
Location
SF sometimes
Shooter
Med. Format RF
Multiple exposures lets you discard all that "Decisive Moment" claptrap and build up images as you see fit.

Here's a Sample

or more abstractly

or with strobe pops and a long exposure:

feb03i-29.jpg


I personally prefer between 20 and 40 exposures per frame, so I rate new Velvia at around ISO 3200 and have at it.
 

garryl

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2003
Messages
542
Location
Fort Worth,
Shooter
35mm
I just want to know, if this is of a single subject(e.g. landscape), how you avoided violating the "law of Intermittence"?
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
22,355
Location
West Midland
Shooter
Multi Format
garryl said:
I just want to know, if this is of a single subject(e.g. landscape), how you avoided violating the "law of Intermittence"?

Not sure what you mean but actually in John Blakemore's early images it's the intermittance as apposed to a continous long exposure thats important.

When you watch a tree in the breeze you see the jerky movement as the wind pulses, his images (many published in 1996 in Inscape) convey this, he might make up a 2 minute exposure with one of a 1/15 seconds, more at an 1/8 some at a 1/30th etc, the combinations are endless.

The image on this site's homepage by Les McLean is not the best example of the technique as its not far different to the result from a continuos exposure. That may be a little harsh as we are ony seeing a low res version.

I have used the technique myself and it produces amazing images, if I had a larger scanner I'd scan an exhibition print but at 20"x30" it's too large for an A4 scanner.

Now coming more upto date John Blakemore has still been using similar techniques for still life images, adding and subtracting obects during the exposures . . . .
 

garryl

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2003
Messages
542
Location
Fort Worth,
Shooter
35mm
The "law of intermittence" states that several short exposures will not produce the same density as one long continuous exposure.

4 exposures of 1/4 second does not equal an exposure of 1 full second of a object.
However I see that your trying to show change of movement, so we can esthically
ignore the law- I guess.
 

Les McLean

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 18, 2002
Messages
1,607
Location
Northern Eng
Shooter
Multi Format
Ian Grant said:
Les is merely describing the techniques he picked up from John himself.



Just to put the record straight Ian, I was doing the multiple exposure thing a couple of years before I had seen John's work and several years before I met him. As a matter of interest I have spent part of this week with John in Hoopers Gallery hanging his forthcomming show and we had a long discussion about the effects of multiple exposures for John didn't think that lots of multiple exposures where any different from one long exposure. I explained the differences and he concured. If you can make it to the Hoopers Gallery in the next month the show is worth seeing, there are 38 prints of his early landscape photography including a number of multiple exposures on both water and trees.
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
22,355
Location
West Midland
Shooter
Multi Format
Like you Les I also used the multiple exposure techniques before I met John, but although I'd only seen early published work I'd heard of the technique he was using in various UK magazines..

I did place a link to the Hoopers Gallery exhibition earlier in this thread.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom