them long exposure pictures
- Thread starter markc
- Start date
- Status
Anything with a BULB setting
Logon or register to see this image
Logon or register to see this image
Last edited:
clyde
Winger
some compact cameras allow it i think, maybe not full bulb mode but certainly a few seconds plus, my old fuji did anyway, also check "night" setting as that usually allows shots of more than a few seconds...you'll alos need to use a tripod or something else to keep the camera steady such as placing it on a table or a wall or similar, a 2 second delayed shot will also help so the camera doesnt move when the shutter is fired.
H
hully2000
Guest
Bulb is only on SLRs I'm pretty sure. But many point and shoot cameras have manual settings that allow for long shutter speeds eg look at the Lumix LX5 which does up to 60 secs i think
The Great Soprendo
Striker
Also note that on SLRs you don't necessarily have to use bulb either, long exposures are very often possible in programme or aperture priority modes too, and the camera will attempt to work out how long is required. You'll also probably need a tripod.
Also, what exactly do you have in mind? If you want to blur fast moving objects (like a river or car, or show streaks of light from traffic at night), it might well be possible with the majority of compact cameras that have a suitable setting that will allow exposures of up to a few seconds or more. At the opposite extreme, for photos of the night sky you might leave the shutter open for hours, and would need something more controllable like an SLR.
Also, what exactly do you have in mind? If you want to blur fast moving objects (like a river or car, or show streaks of light from traffic at night), it might well be possible with the majority of compact cameras that have a suitable setting that will allow exposures of up to a few seconds or more. At the opposite extreme, for photos of the night sky you might leave the shutter open for hours, and would need something more controllable like an SLR.
Last edited:
neiluk1985
Midfield
I've tried doing long exposures using my sony a300, and in some cases, I've noticed that weird coloured pixels appear. any ideas what that could be? I use lightroom for my raw files, but it only seems to happen on long exposures.
The Great Soprendo
Striker
Dunno, but never happens with this. Might not fit in the card reader though.
Logon or register to see this image
D
Deleted member 13178
Guest
Hot Pixels...expected on most digi long exposures, especially at higher ISO. Just imagine you've shot it on film and you have to clone the dust from your scans.
For long exposures, I mostly use one of these - pain in the arse camera:
Logon or register to see this image
And often one of these, focusing at night is fun:
[imghttp://collectiblend.com/Cameras/images/Graflex-Crown-Graphic.jpg[/img]
Logon or register to see this image
neiluk1985
Midfield
Hot Pixels...expected on most digi long exposures, especially at higher ISO. Just imagine you've shot it on film and you have to clone the dust from your scans.
For long exposures, I mostly use one of these - pain in the arse camera:
Logon or register to see this image
And often one of these, focusing at night is fun:
[imghttp://collectiblend.com/Cameras/images/Graflex-Crown-Graphic.jpg[/img]
Logon or register to see this image
all part of the fun man! so i take it these hot pixels are down to the camera, rather than software then? I think i'd be too scared to leave the house with those cameras you've got so i might just have to put up with it for now.
D
Deleted member 13178
Guest
Aye, I do find the Adobe Raw seems to cut down on them a bit like from RAW-JPG conversions. Sure there'll be some hot pixel removal software around. I think having noise reduction activated on your camera helps too, although normally doubles exposure time. Not good if you're doing a 3hr exposure!
Surprisingly not, the two of them combined would probably still add up to less than a mid range DSLR body...
neiluk1985
Midfield
Aye, I do find the Adobe Raw seems to cut down on them a bit like from RAW-JPG conversions. Sure there'll be some hot pixel removal software around. I think having noise reduction activated on your camera helps too, although normally doubles exposure time. Not good if you're doing a 3hr exposure!
Surprisingly not, the two of them combined would probably still add up to less than a mid range DSLR body...
it must be a bugger if you nudge the camera after 3 hours
aye i've got NR switched on like but i might have to have a look around for some hot pixel plugins as well
smoker
Striker
Aye, I do find the Adobe Raw seems to cut down on them a bit like from RAW-JPG conversions. Sure there'll be some hot pixel removal software around. I think having noise reduction activated on your camera helps too, although normally doubles exposure time. Not good if you're doing a 3hr exposure!
Surprisingly not, the two of them combined would probably still add up to less than a mid range DSLR body...
How much is the film and processing on those Andy? Now I've got a set of 6x7 lenses (which I use with my CCD camera) I've been tempted to get a 6x7 body and some film to clart about with.
clyde
Winger
Aye, I do find the Adobe Raw seems to cut down on them a bit like from RAW-JPG conversions. Sure there'll be some hot pixel removal software around. I think having noise reduction activated on your camera helps too, although normally doubles exposure time. Not good if you're doing a 3hr exposure!
Surprisingly not, the two of them combined would probably still add up to less than a mid range DSLR body...
taking the hot pixels out is pretty easy in lightroom if you can get a hold of a copy, works pretty well at cleaning up noise too.
yes, if you turn on in camera noise reduction on the sony's it double the exposure time kinda, well say you take a 60 second shot and then you have to wait another 60 seconds for it to show up on the viewer.
i used to get loads of hot pixels on my sony a200, dont get any on my newer a500 though, huge improvement
D
Deleted member 13178
Guest
Slide film works out about £3-4 per roll of 120 for process only, maybe a little bit less for C41. Price of film on top of it yer looking at 6-7 a roll maybe, not bad I reckon. Or B&W is massively cheaper if you do it at home. I'd say go for it!
smoker
Striker
Slide film works out about £3-4 per roll of 120 for process only, maybe a little bit less for C41. Price of film on top of it yer looking at 6-7 a roll maybe, not bad I reckon. Or B&W is massively cheaper if you do it at home. I'd say go for it!
Cheers matey. At what stage do you scan?
I've done a bit of B&W processing before and could put up with processing the film, but doing prints is a pain in the arse (would also have to shell out for an enlarger).
D
Deleted member 13178
Guest
I just scan the negs once they're processed...think thats what you meant?
smoker
Striker
I just scan the negs once they're processed...think thats what you meant?
Yes. I meant do you scan the negs or prints. I don't want to develop prints as it's a right clart on and I never got it right. I think I've got a negative lightbox jobbie for my scanner somewhere.
- Status
