ICM Photography - Intentional Camera Movement Discussion

Starzee said:
This looks so fierce.
Click to expand...
It was! Beaches and cliffs are closed off, part of the Capitola wharf got swept away, and the storm surge is getting water places where it shouldn't.

Starzee said:
The problem I have with Bluristic is that it stops working if I’m walking along taking multiple photos. If I pause for a short time, it freezes forcing me to close and reopen it.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen that with Bluristic, but I have with other camera apps now and then. Genies in bottles are hard to find these days, so I usually restart, and if that doesn't work, reinstall the app. Sometimes helps, sometimes doesn't.
 
B1300491-EB66-4663-B431-85388BA14D95.jpeg


Another from the same session
Bluristic + Pixelmator Photo + about 20% Glow/1 from iColorama
 
I'm still having a go at ICM stuff using Slow Shutter Cam. Sometimes the 'texture' works with the image, often not, but smoothing it out doesn't always work either.

I don't mind the texture so much in this one.
IMG_7286.jpeg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alpaca said:
I'm still having a go at ICM stuff using Slow Shutter Cam. Sometimes the 'texture' works with the image, often not, but smoothing it out doesn't always work either.

I don't mind the texture so much in this one.View attachment 195183
Click to expand...
Yes, I find the same. It seems to be the case with all the slow shutter apps I've tried for ICM. The only way around it that I've found is to use a physical neutral density filter combined with a manual camera app like Halide or ProCamera that lets you set longer shutter speeds.
 
terse said:
Yes, I find the same. It seems to be the case with all the slow shutter apps I've tried for ICM. The only way around it that I've found is to use a physical neutral density filter combined with a manual camera app like Halide or ProCamera that lets you set longer shutter speeds.
Click to expand...
Is the ND filter a clip on? I used to have one of those.
 
Starzee said:
Is the ND filter a clip on? I used to have one of those.
Click to expand...
Mine is a regular 37mm screw-on ND filter. It screws into an adapter from Moment, which then mounts on a Moment case (which I have because I use their lenses). A clip-on would work fine, though, since the exact positioning isn't important, as long as it stays out of the picture. You ought to dig that filter out of the drawer if you've still got it.
 
terse said:
Mine is a regular 37mm screw-on ND filter. It screws into an adapter from Moment, which then mounts on a Moment case (which I have because I use their lenses). A clip-on would work fine, though, since the exact positioning isn't important, as long as it stays out of the picture. You ought to dig that filter out of the drawer if you've still got it.
Click to expand...
I’m looking. I think it was a 37mm polarized lens, but I’m pretty sure I had a neutral density, too. I had several when I was using my canon..

Edit: I did find the clip but only the polarized lens. It has a small openning that makes it difficult to get positioned right and it won’t reach the .5 lens.
IMG_9596.jpeg

However a minutes google led me to this.
I think it may be worth $19 to experiment with that.
 
Last edited:
Starzee said:
I’m looking. I think it was a 37mm polarized lens, but I’m pretty sure I had a neutral density, too. I had several when I was using my canon..

Edit: I did find the clip but only the polarized lens. It has a small openning that makes it difficult to get positioned right and it won’t reach the .5 lens.
View attachment 195214
However a minutes google led me to this.
I think it may be worth $19 to experiment with that.
Click to expand...
Maybe you could cut away some of that plastic to make a larger opening?
 
terse said:
Maybe you could cut away some of that plastic to make a larger opening?
Click to expand...
Not a bad idea. I would still have to get another neutral density filter, though. I am intrigued with this one saying it’s ND2-ND400.
 
Starzee said:
Not a bad idea. I would still have to get another neutral density filter, though. I am intrigued with this one saying it’s ND2-ND400.
Click to expand...
I use one of those variable filters. They work. A quirk of mine (and some others, I gather, from reading comments) is that when you dial them to the max, you can see a darker X shape in your image. I don't know if all variable NDs do this. I just use mine a bit short of the maximum.

From what I've read, a variable ND filter is actually two polarizing filters stacked together. When the two are in the same orientation, you get the smallest light reduction. As you rotate one filter, the combination blocks more and more light. ND400 is about 8.5 stops, I think.
 
terse said:
I use one of those variable filters. They work. A quirk of mine (and some others, I gather, from reading comments) is that when you dial them to the max, you can see a darker X shape in your image. I don't know if all variable NDs do this. I just use mine a bit short of the maximum.

From what I've read, a variable ND filter is actually two polarizing filters stacked together. When the two are in the same orientation, you get the smallest light reduction. As you rotate one filter, the combination blocks more and more light. ND400 is about 8.5 stops, I think.
Click to expand...
Aha!!!!! That’s what I used! Two polarized filters stacked. I probably foolishly threw the other one away when we were having the work done on the house. I think I’ll try shaving the opening on the one I have and using the polarizer a few time to see if that works better. It’s not that the opening isn’t centered on the lens. Sometimes I can see perfectly. Others half the image is black.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom