Hello,

This was my first attempt at double in-camera exposure. The only post is crop and color.

All comments are welcome



The exif info can be found here

Interesting ... it's been many years since I tried (slide film) a double exposure (in camera).

Curious @ Exif though, it only shows data for one exposure (that I was able to see).

Welcome to FM and the PC Forum.

RustyBug wrote:
Interesting ... it's been many years since I tried (slide film) a double exposure (in camera).

Curious @ Exif though, it only shows data for one exposure (that I was able to see).




You're right, i didn't even notice that the exif shows only one exposure...
Wonder if there's a way to get info for both? are there any utilities for that?

I'm guessing that it might show up in your OEM D800E Nikon software, but the database for Flickr probably doesn't have a corresponding field for the extra info to be mapped into. I wouldn't expect too many third party software would go to trouble of writing code for something as obscure as double exposure info that exists in so few cameras.

You might even want to do something obscure & "old school" ... like carry a small notebook in your bag to write it down and make a note of it while it is still in your memory.

From googling it, it seems that only first exposure Photo EXIF information is stored.
Also at default settings the maximum interval between exposures is 30s.
From what i remember, i didn't change any settings while making this shot, except for framing and focusing, so it's safe to assume that the second exposure has the same settings as first...

Interesting...

My old Nikon FE simply had a "clutch" that would release from the film winder. You could "recock" the shutter without advancing the film ... unlimited number of times, or even days (or longer) between exposures as you were inclined.

So, what's your take so far on the "in camera" vs. taking two independent images and blending them in post? I seem to remember it being fairly challenging "in camera" (esp. without a grid screen) ... which, btw ... nice job.

Well, it might sound lame, but while i'm learning (and i'm still in the early stages) i kinda get a kick out of doing as much as possible in-camera and as little as possible in post. The way i see it, post is an art in itself, and a whole other can of worms I want to see how far the camera will take me, and also learn about all the aspects of it, to be able to use it to its full potential. That said, pretty much all of my pictures go through Lightroom, and inevitably all get some sort of treatment (noise, exposure, crop, etc...)
The multi-exposure is a lot more fun doing in camera. At least when playing around, and when you don't have to produce tons and tons of them for some work assignment. It is true, though, that using photoshop one can achieve far better results if time permits. and it's a lot more flexible...
For me, at this point - i just want to learn as much as i can about using the actual camera as possible.

As far as your FE experience - i remember a few accidental multiple exposure pictures we used to take back in the day, and those always stood out. Too bad i wasn't into photography then... would've been even more fun (both - camera and post in the actual dark room)

+1 @ joy of challenge / experimentation ... good stuff.

Thanks for the comments

I'll post more things here soon

These types of images have started to be pretty popular recently. I like yours. Well done.

Have you seen this photographer's work? I think he helped with the recent popularity but I doubt he was the first.

http://www.jasperjames.co.uk/project/people-and-places-2/

The was a debate on the wedding forum a while back about whether these images are double exposures or photoshop or somehow done without either of those things. I think, like yours, that most are double exposures but it is possible to do these using nothing but appropriately-placed glass and the right light.

Here is a proof-of-concept that I did. It is certainly not going to win any awards; it was a spur-of-the-moment set-up with my visiting niece:

Thanks for liking my picture.

Awesome link to the Jasper James work. i haven't seen it before, and i like what i see. Thank you! I'm sure the debate was pretty heated, these images could've been done a number of ways, and yours is really cool as well. For me, he bottom line is the images look pretty creative and the details of how they were created are somewhat secondary to the final result. I hope i'll get a chance to experiment with this as well.

Once again, thank you for the links and comments, this is great stuff ...

ThinkDima, I'd suggest cropping out the top of the image. Just my $0.02.
And welcome

Noted on the crop. I think I was trying to keep the original ratio. But I see your point
Thanks.

Actually, I think it gets real nice if cropped to remove the 'blank' top of the image but keeping the 2:3 aspect ratio. You'll have to crop a little bit of the left and of the right, however (you won't lose anything on the left side, just a little bit of the image on the right side).

Agreed. And now that I think about, I wouldn't mind losing the original ratio if it'll make the image easier on the eyes. Will play with it.