Topic: POW Week 4: Long Exposure

Not sure this works on all digies, so if not - it's time u get an SLR : )

Topic: Long exposure on moving object (that means no nightshots of buildings, etc)

quote:

---

Guidelines:
1. Photo needs to go along with the subject in some way.
2. Use thumbnails for photos with any dimension larger than 450 px or over 40 kb.
3. Post as many as you want.
4. At the end of the week the person who chose the topic will pick someone to choose the next topic. This isn't a "winner," just someone who gets to suggest the next topic.
5. No critiques (unless requested) this is just to share our photos.
6. No sigs.

---

[This message has been edited by asptamer (edited 04-14-2003).]

cool! second one kinda reminds me of graffiti.

2nd last one is beautiful.

Hi, I'm new here. Here's one of two of my photos taken with a Lomo LC-A.






Sorry about the sizes.



[This message has been edited by specialpurpose (edited 04-14-2003).]

Nice job, specialpurpose... what are u doing with all those cameras ? : ) Holga rox!
u got a website? if not, wanna post some more cool pix? (in a separate topic

Friend of mine used to do these with firecrackers. Some great pics.

I didn't have many photos to fit this topic till tonight. All of these were taken along the shore of Lake Superior in Duluth, MN.

5-10 sec exposures.







:::krets.net:::

[This message has been edited by krets (edited 04-15-2003).]

wow.

The colors on the middle one are amazing! is that a digy or an SLR ? What camera did you use to take these pictures?

Thanks guys. It's a digcam; a Sony DSC-F707. You can take up to 30 second exposures with it.

Only thing I did in PS is adjust the levels a bit and sharpen.

:::krets.net:::

Ok guys just went through a fucking ridiculous conversation with one of my fiends. Especially about that bridge by krets ! The contrast in the image is quite stunning, great camera work and what the image does lack is pretty much everything one would teach during a creative class wether it be first photography class or first drawing. It lacks style, an artistic expression, the fact that you are taking a picture of a bridge just retrieves your personality outwards. You dont know what you are doing with that camera, nor do you have any idea of an artistic expression. Yet the artist does portray some of this ideal in moving ice where they have a nice composition, nice colours and a tiny bit of mystique. There is no notion behind the movingice image, its just a nice composition overall but its 100 times more pleasuable to look at than one of the bridge. I would rate this artist as an average camera techie and beginner in photography. You have what it takes, just spend some time reading art-history books, get into the idea of understanding great works of art, ask yourself questions on why they put this here and why this there because 99% of the time there is a reason for everything down to the finest detail.. a line... so long... Art

quote:

---

5. No critiques (unless requested) this is just to share our photos.

---

now, share a photo with us, rawbot.

edit: ...and rule number 6 is no sigs, heh.

[This message has been edited by reitsma (edited 04-15-2003).]

Yes indeed, no critique, I wont speak for Krets (since he started this whole thing), but I never mind when my work is critisized. Gives me ideas on how to improve my work - while plain flattery or just nice comments only tell u what needs less work. After all, noone complained when people said "nice pics," so why cant someone say "bad pics : ) Let's be openminded here...

So with permission of the author (Krets), I'd like to propose to replace the 5th rule : )

5. Critiques are welcome unless the owner of the images asks his work not to be criticized.

Well, "you dont know what you are doing with that camera, nor do you have any idea of an artistic expression" is a bit on the harsh side. That kind of statement should be left to the specifically-requested critiques, and even then it's a bit on the discouraging rather than constructive side.

Well, considering rawbot has made done absolutely nothing positive in the Asylum to this point, has done nothing to show what kind of pedigree they have to judge my photography so harshly, and seems to be singling my photos out, I'll just treat that as one person's opinion. This particular person has done nothing to gain my respect so, although I read through their "critique," I'm not going to take it to heart.

I still stand by my original plan for this as a place to share a photo, not have it judged. I'd prefer to leave it at critiques only when requested or you can simply start a new thread. However, if a large number of folks desire to change the rules, I wouldn't have any objections.

:::krets.net:::

The rules are just fine how they are. If someone wants a critique on a photo they can post it in it's own thread asking for one

I found it odd they just selected your photo out of them all and didn't post a website or any info on themselves. So, as you said, take it for what it's worth.

Beautiful pictures, krets.

And I definitely agree with Shiiiz that the rules are fine as they stand.

Anyway, here goes my first post in this part of Ozone. I'm not sure if these qualify since the longest exposure I can get out of my camera seems to be a few seconds, but here goes anyway.

First two are at the longest exposure time and the last is maybe a second of exposure or so.




If anyone's interested, it's my brother and I doing a fire-knife dance in the front yard at night.

Silence, those are (here comes an unsolicited critique) beautiful!

Great work so far guys... Starting this topic I wasnt sure if many people had done any work in this area, but it's pleasing to see what other effects and variations are possible with long exposure...

Long exposures are best when used subtly, I think. Long as in between 1/15 and 4sec. They create a more ethereal quality on occasion but I think it's best used when trying to emphasise movement. Otherwise, it's doing it for the sake of doing it. Rawbot69 got me thinking so I'll go off start another thread...

That's what you think. I think that exposures of less than 4 seconds just look like spoiled photographs. Not all, but for the most part - when I think "Long exposure" I think 8+ seconds.

Whatever you like, like .

Well Krets I did do.... explained myself why I picked your image and I did provide a few good points with the bad.
Would you like to see my work?
http://www.artcenter.ac/rawbot69/ This is a portfolio, I got sick of the good old 2advanced.com look everyone was stealing and made something different. This was made way back in 2001 I can do much better now.

And these are models I have done for the game I am working on with a few guys. http://www.artcenter.ac/mh/ all design and models are copyrighted to me = Arseniy Tomkevich.

Take care.. Arseniy

^^ Quick snap from yesterday, bout a quarter second if memory serves. It's not tack but you get the idea.. "long" is a relative term.




^^ © shared on those two and the linked pix are small. It's been a while but I'm guessing the fireworks shot was about 2.. maybe 3 seconds at f2.8 with a tele and fuji 400 reversal film. The lightning pic I'm sure was shot at f5.6.. somehwere around 10 seconds on 100 speed kodak slide film. A neat trick for this stuff is to spot meter the city lights and overexpose by a couple stops.

the most fantastic long exposure pics i've seen are of people sitting around the campfire.

there's no way flash photography can capture that sort of warmth.

and further on kret's image - let's have a quick look at purpose here, fellas.

this don't have to be art, as rawbot describes it, anyways.

what about a forensics photo? mugshots? surveyors' pics? or maybe even good old experimentation - which, i believe, is the "purpose" of krets' photo (if i may be so bold as to assume)?

with this in mind, we can see why critiques aren't welcomed in these threads, yet the odd "ooh!" and "aah!" are permissable. A proper critique of a piece analyses how well it fulfills its purpose, how well it communicates its message. And we aren't told these things - so any critiques are uninformed.

so rawbot - when krets posts this image, and says "i plan on putting this image up in my art collection - i wanted to convey how there is beauty even in the most cold, mathematical aspects of life", then you can tell him that he needs to go back to art school, ok?

sorry guys for the digression - hopefully i cleared things up a little though.

I am loving this subject matter! Really cool stuff.

rawbot69, if knowing as much as you do about "art" means that Krets' bridge doesn't cut it, then I don't want to know what you know. I absolutely love that picture.

YES YES !!! Ignorance is bliss.....

Here's another. All those shots were taken with my Lomo LC-A (Russian 80s compact camera) so I don't know the shutter speed on this one. It was shot on Elitechrome 400, cross processed.





[This message has been edited by specialpurpose (edited 04-20-2003).]

just a couple points -

* Some really nice imagery in here so far. Is it all "art"? Well...no. But my impression about this exercise didn't really inlcude the images needing to be "art" per se. I see some of these more like sketches and doodles...and sketches and doodles are always good to see IMO.

* I think critiques are just fine and dandy. I think people giving a critique should keep it pretty limited in this type of exercise, given the firts point

* Rawbot - *please* drop over to the 'Site Reveiws' forum with a link to your site, as you could certainly use some tips on that end of things. I can't comment on your photos as I shut the window rather quickly after it began loading...

art.. art... who cares if its art or not as long as it looks good : )


I think this does it for the week, so,

specialpurpose, pick the next topic : )

Hehe, cool, thanks! I'll get back to you ASAP with the next topic {I did win, right?}

nah... u didnt win : ) once again, there are no winners/losers here, this is just to share our pics
But if u wanna know, I picked u because

1) you're new here
2) you went and started that whole argument about mechanical masturbation
3) you've shown us some nice long exp. pics, which probably means youre in to photography, and can come up with a not less interesting topic

But isn't picking the next topic winning in itself! Hmm... I better get my thinking cap on. I'm getting there, be ack to you tomorrow.

Tomorrow?

Quit slacking and pick a topic!



:::krets.net:::