Two images from the cascading waterfall at Whiney Portal. Both with SR app and 64-image but I didn't get that smooth, milky appearance of the water I was expecting. Maybe there was simply too much water and the individual shutter speeds were too fast since it was bright. I was at this location some 12 years ago and 1 sec regular exposure was enough to create that smooth appearance. Maybe I felt too cocky and relied too much on the app. I left the physical ND filter in the car through out this trip and at this particular location, I didn't feel like hiking back down to get it .
Looks like a nice location Joshua but the water does indeed look a bit funky. I am going to try out (hopefully) the SR app this weekend but am not sure what settings to start with. I suppose it is best to guess what length of exposure is best and then calculate roughly how many shots you need?
AGeoJO wrote:
Two images from the cascading waterfall at Whiney Portal. Both with SR app and 64-image but I didn't get that smooth, milky appearance of the water I was expecting. Maybe there was simply too much water and the individual shutter speeds were too fast since it was bright. I was at this location some 12 years ago and 1 sec regular exposure was enough to create that smooth appearance. Maybe I felt too cocky and relied too much on the app. I left the physical ND filter in the car through out this trip and at this particular location, I didn't feel like hiking back down to get it ....Show more →
Hey Joshua I wonder if 64 images is too many for the waterfall! I've experienced something similar and sometimes less is more! Still, what a great composition of a great scene.
Gary Clennan wrote:
Looks like a nice location Joshua but the water does indeed look a bit funky. I am going to try out (hopefully) the SR app this weekend but am not sure what settings to start with. I suppose it is best to guess what length of exposure is best and then calculate roughly how many shots you need?
Thank you, Gary. You can choose the mode of blending, depending on the effect; waterfall, waves, reflection, etc. And you can choose 4 different settings; minor, moderate, strong and manual. From what i could gather from other folks' settings, the most common used is between 64 and 128 shutter actuations. I noticed that the each setting in the camera can vary depending on the actual conditions. It looks like the camera can recognize the situation and decide how many shutter actuations are good for what setting under those specific conditions.
In my situation, I am convinced that the wonkiness has to do with the shutter speed for each capture. It was simply too bright that day. I should have used a slower shutter speed by stopping down the aperture more. On the monitor when viewed in the field, the water of my images looked fine and actually quite good and not just smooth.
rji2goleez wrote:
Hey Joshua I wonder if 64 images is too many for the waterfall! I've experienced something similar and sometimes less is more! Still, what a great composition of a great scene.
Bob, thank you! That's a possibility, too, I guess. It is worth experimenting some more. That waterfall is awesome in the fall. Maybe I should go back there and redo the shoot.
AGeoJO wrote:
Two images from the cascading waterfall at Whiney Portal. Both with SR app and 64-image but I didn't get that smooth, milky appearance of the water I was expecting. Maybe there was simply too much water and the individual shutter speeds were too fast since it was bright. I was at this location some 12 years ago and 1 sec regular exposure was enough to create that smooth appearance. Maybe I felt too cocky and relied too much on the app. I left the physical ND filter in the car through out this trip and at this particular location, I didn't feel like hiking back down to get it ....Show more →
I have found that the SR app works well only within certain limits.
It does a nice job on clouds, and can do a decent job on moving water if it's on the longer side of exposures.
However, like what you've just discovered (in my case, it was with ocean waves) it gives a somewhat choppy appearance to the water if the shutter speed is too high given the lighting conditions.
I've gone back to carrying my ND set with me and deciding whether to use the app or the ND according to the setting.
puckman wrote:
I have found that the SR app works well only within certain limits.
It does a nice job on clouds, and can do a decent job on moving water if it's on the longer side of exposures.
However, like what you've just discovered (in my case, it was with ocean waves) it gives a somewhat choppy appearance to the water if the shutter speed is too high given the lighting conditions.
I've gone back to carrying my ND set with me and deciding whether to use the app or the ND according to the setting.
MJKoski wrote:
Joshua, that is why I still use traditional ND-filters. They are perfectly fine up to 30 seconds if you chase high IQ.
Gentlemen, you are right on the money. That app worked wonders in Vegas at the Bellagio Fountain, at the South Tufa, Mono Lake and to get streaks in the clouds at the Ancient Bristlecone Pine forest. Yup, I got too "cocky" there and went overboard with it. The ironic thing is I had my ND filter in a different bag but left it in the car and didn't use it at all throughout the trip until the very last stop here at the waterfall, where it would have been different. Oh, well.
I believe that a combination of physical ND filter and this app may have worked better here.
Indeed, combination might work. I used to do very milky and smooth waterfalls in the past but these days I try to keep it down to 1-2 seconds. This way I can have the needed smoothness and still have some "energy" of the water present.
Different day, different light and even cameras and sensor stacks; clearly unfair comparison to both lenses, but that's all I got. So, SEM21 gets the bite on 36MP but at additional PP work; Loxia on 42MP gets it easy
Got myself a Contax "Hollywood" 28/2 to try. A lens with quite unique characteristics. First is a skyshot of the roofs on the other side of the street. Note the birds. Below are growing chicks from a family living on the mid-left roof, shot with Contax 100-300 + Mutar II with the Sony A7II.
Photo taken the evening of April 24, 2016, at 7:01 PM (49 minutes before sunset), looking at farmers fields along Loch Valley Road, New Tripoli, PA. Image taken with my tripod mounted A7rM V3 and my Zeiss 35mm f1.4 Distagon ZM lens, ISO 100, lens set to f11 for 1/60 second. Exposure corrected by +0.24 Stops and processed with CornerFix and LR6.
.
