Glasshousebc
MobiStar
- Real Name
- Steve
- Device
- iPhone 11
I couldn’t see a specific thread... so here we go.
Sioux Falls.
iPhone 7, snapseed
Nominations for the April Image of the Month (IotM) close at the end of the day on Tuesday, April 30. Get your four nominations in!
Fabulous.View attachment 145929
I couldn’t see a specific thread... so here we go.
Sioux Falls.
iPhone 7, snapseed
Lovely image SteveView attachment 145929
I couldn’t see a specific thread... so here we go.
Sioux Falls.
iPhone 7, snapseed
A couple of thoughts:So here's a talking point and please don't take this personally Steve as I think its a great image, but why do 'photographers' always go for that long exposure thing with waterfalls / moving water?
There are fairly recent examples from terse and probably FundyBrian too. I'm always perplexed about it, yes the images look stunning and are technically clever, but does flowing water really look like that?
Thoughts anyone?
No worries mate.So here's a talking point and please don't take this personally Steve as I think its a great image, but why do 'photographers' always go for that long exposure thing with waterfalls / moving water?
There are fairly recent examples from terse and probably FundyBrian too. I'm always perplexed about it, yes the images look stunning and are technically clever, but does flowing water really look like that?
Thoughts anyone?
Wow.View attachment 145929
I couldn’t see a specific thread... so here we go.
Sioux Falls.
iPhone 7, snapseed
So here's a talking point and please don't take this personally Steve as I think its a great image, but why do 'photographers' always go for that long exposure thing with waterfalls / moving water?
There are fairly recent examples from terse and probably FundyBrian too. I'm always perplexed about it, yes the images look stunning and are technically clever, but does flowing water really look like that?
Thoughts anyone?
It’s just a matter of personal expression. Water is moving, except when it’s frozen, or stagnant. So if I have the choice to depict water in motion or static, I generally choose motion, but not always. The situation tends to suggest the type expression. Actually, I prefer slow shutter speed video for water. Still photos of moving water are sort of lifeless. Over and over in presentations of mixed video and stills I have found that the still photos come out rather lifeless by comparison so over time the presentations moved towards more video and fewer stills. That is the whole problem right there. Water moves, pictures don’t. So all the different techniques come about as a result of being unhappy with a static expression of moving water.So here's a talking point and please don't take this personally Steve as I think its a great image, but why do 'photographers' always go for that long exposure thing with waterfalls / moving water?
There are fairly recent examples from terse and probably FundyBrian too. I'm always perplexed about it, yes the images look stunning and are technically clever, but does flowing water really look like that?
Thoughts anyone?
Needed a tripod really but I was balancing on rocks for this so I'm impressed there's not more camera shake.
View attachment 146113
Wow, isn’t that beautiful. And it’s great to have Lorraine in one so that we can see how tall it actually is.Fall Creek Falls, in Oregon... with uncropped photo with Lorraine to show scaleView attachment 152520View attachment 152521
Truly beautiful area, just off the North Umqua River.
iphone 11, Lightroom Mobile
So lush...Fall Creek Falls, in Oregon... with uncropped photo with Lorraine to show scaleView attachment 152520View attachment 152521
Truly beautiful area, just off the North Umqua River.
iphone 11, Lightroom Mobile