# slow shutter speed photography...



## jonas (Mar 1, 2007)

hi there so im new to the forum. So theres this photographer called Rut Blees Luxemburg(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rut_Blees_Luxemburg), a german who specializes in night time photography and she uses really long exposure times to create these brilliant images. You may have seen her work on the cover of the new Bloc Party album. Well basically i know not a hell of a lot about shutter speeds and exposure times..Well basically id love to try my hand at that sort of photography ie taking night time pictures with the camera on long exposure..i just love that look http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Shutter_speed_slow_(2).jpg As a beginner though i dont think it would be wise to go out and purchase a pro camera that i wopuldnt have a clue how to use and also im not made of money! But where would be a good place to start...do i go down th digiatal route or what?? im only a beginner and i  guess at this stage im just nurturing but what would you guys advise?? id really appreciate any advice.....


----------



## Efergoh (Mar 1, 2007)

Digital and long exposures are not really a happy marriage. Now, when I say long exposure, I mean exposures that are measured in minutes. I don't think 35mm yields enough detail to justify the effort involved.

If long exposure photography is what you want to try, I suggest exploring some low end medium format cameras whose shutters have a "T" setting (many 35mm cameras do not). You don't have to limit yourself to night time photography for long exposure. You can use neutral density filters to slow down light in your camera and get those long exposures during the day.

I would suggest that you take at least a basic photography class and learn the fundamentals of photography before diving into long exposures. 
Walk before you run, and Crawl before you walk.


----------



## LaFoto (Mar 1, 2007)

Hi Jonas, welcome to ThePhotoForum.
The FAQs say please not to post multiple posts into different forums, so I merged your posts and deleted one of them. OK?

A photo like the one in the example you are showing can be achieved fairly easily.
All you need is a tripod, a camera on that, a good spot, night time, the camera manually set to a long exposure (not necessarily minutes, 15 - 20 seconds will also do), and a car going by. That's all. 

Browse this forum by using the SEARCH button entering "Light Trails" or "City Lights" or even "Long Exposures", for example, and you will find photos on here that I personally think are of a much, much better quality than the one that you are using as your example here. Sorry if I am saying something not-so-good about someone who maybe is a very prominent and famous photographer, but that is what I think: that photo is not really good.


----------



## LaFoto (Mar 1, 2007)

And if you are interested, I can show you an example photo of lighttrails taken with a very normal compact digital camera, often also referred to as "point-and-shoot", which only allows me to go down to f8 and a maximum of 15 seconds as its longest possible expousre, and it still works. So to achieve this does not ask for a big, expensive camera. All you need to know is a bit of photography.


----------



## jonas (Mar 1, 2007)

cheers guys thanks very much..aye i know that photo was just quick to hand so i copied and pasted it..I know that the more i know the more ill be able to get out of photography.so you say that the point and shoot consumer models would be able to produce that effect...Interesting, i guess illl just have to educate myself a bit more but yeah id love to see some better examples too.


----------



## LaFoto (Mar 1, 2007)

Hang on, there is one thing that I now no longer understand: the photo that you used as your example for the much-admired-by-yourself nighttime photography of that Rut Blees Luxemburg ... whose photo is it? Is it the work of that self-same Rut Blees Luxemburg or is it YOUR photo, and YOUR attempt to copy her work?


----------



## LaFoto (Mar 1, 2007)

This is the thread I was thinking about and the second photo has one light trail, but as I can see, you have already found other night photos taken in bigger cities than precisely Brandenburg in Brandenburg in East Germany........ OK.


----------



## neea (Mar 1, 2007)

I'll join you LaFoto.
I too believe that no special equipment or medium format camera is required for this. It sounds silly really.
Any camera that has the ability to change the shutter speed manually can do this. Even point and shoots.

Welcome to the forum jonas. I hope we can all help you learn the great world of photography.


----------



## jonas (Mar 1, 2007)

the photo you see when you click on the link? i dunno whose that is...it aint mine thats for sure.


----------



## RacePhoto (Mar 1, 2007)

*All you need is any old camera that has "B" for Bulb.*

It's called bulb because, photographers used to use an air bulb to open and close the shutter. (not because of Flash Bulb)   Thumb over the hole in the end, made it pressurize and open the shutter or later create a vacuum to close the shutter.

You don't need a fast lens, flash, light meters, or much else, because all the electronics and devices become pretty much useless for long exposures.

You can have a watch with a sweep second hand or just count to yourself if you are good at it. I don't think anyone will argue that 2:02 is going to make any difference from 1:58 with four seconds difference.

Time exposures do take an understand of the basics, but after that, it's mostly experimental. Which makes it fun. It's also not high science, so there's allot of room for error and you'll still get pictures.

You need a camera that has a hole for cable release, a tripod, a cable release THAT LOCKS, and A NOTE BOOK. (some film of course) You can use pretty much whatever lens you have, because speed doesn't matter, but composition does, so you'll have to work within those limitations. It doesn't have to be sharp or expensive. Long exposures have a tendency to show light flare. You are going to be shooting at f/8 or more to get good depth of field. 

If you can find a cheap digital kitchen timer at the local dollar store, get one. You can use that for a reminder on the longer exposures, so you don't have to sit and watch the clock.

The locking cable release is so you can take those long exposures and not have to stand, holding it open. If you are camping, you can go have a beverage, walk around, eat some chips... 

You take your film camera, find something you want to photograph that has some light coming from it or falling on it. Set up the shot. Get your notebook and write down the conditions, lens, film speed, settings, and description of the lighting. All pictures f/8 #1=1/60th, 2=1 second, 3=5 seconds, 4=15 seconds, 5=30 seconds, 6=1 minute, 7=2 minutes, 8=3 minutes, 9=5 minutes, 10=10 minutes, 11=15 minutes.

Find another scene. Take notes, take 11 more pictures in the above sequence or whatever you decide you like, but you need a range from what will probably be under exposed to what will be too much exposure.

24 exposure roll, this leaves you 2 or 3 pictures for mistakes, unplanned lights or errors.

If it's something like a bright Moonlight, use the last two or three pictures and shoot 4 minutes at f/8 of whatever strikes you as interesting.

Go get the film processed. Line the pictures up and see what you got. Now you can see what each time does, how the light changes, how the sharpness changes... how the color changes.

You can do this with a $2 camera from a resale shop, because what you basically need is the tripod, shutter release cable and some film. Better camera, better pictures. But the point is, that for the purposes of learning, you don't need anything fancy or expensive. They sell film at the dollar stores too. 

You'll always need a tripod in the future, so that's not a waste.

The cable release is another story. I still carry one, but none of my digital cameras have a connection for it. 

Some cameras you can push the button and swing the lock on the trigger and they stay open. This is risky because the camera is going to move around.

Keep this in mind. Have Fun! Experiment.

When you get down the basics, you can start to "paint" light with a flashlight on things you want to highlight in your time exposure. You can do all sorts of entertaining things. With a lens cap, you can leave the shutter open and do double and triple exposures. (very carefully, never closing the shutter) Take a night scene, then cover the lens, aim at the Moon and put it up in the corner of the picture.

You can mix two or three subjects that have different exposures, and they will blend into one.


----------



## Efergoh (Mar 1, 2007)

neea said:


> I'll join you LaFoto.
> I too believe that no special equipment or medium format camera is required for this. It sounds silly really.
> Any camera that has the ability to change the shutter speed manually can do this. Even point and shoots.



Again, I point to long exposure being measured in minutes, not seconds. Even if we go with seconds, both my 35mm SLR, and my DSLR only go to 30 seconds, then to Bulb. Since neither of them can accept a cable release, the bulb setting is useless to me because I fear that holding the shutter for longer than 30 seconds (or even 10 seconds) will yield camera shake.

I've never seen an SLR or a DSLR with a T setting for the shutter. For those who don't know, T = Time. With the Bulb setting, the shutter will remain open for as long as you hold it open. With T or Time, you fire the shutter release once to open the shutter, and again to close it. You don't have to sit there and hold it open.

And I still feel that 35mm is too small to yield the excellent results that are possible from long exposures. You don't need to drop a mint on a MF camera to do this, either. I have a Lubitel TLR (Russian knock off of a Rolliflex) for which I paid $20. Focusing is tricky at times because the ground glass isn't much to write home about, but it is still doable. 

I used this camera along with a couple ND filters (not needed at night) and shot long exposures 5-20 minutes during the day. I set up the shot, attached the cable release, opened the shutter, had a smoke and a coke, came back and closed the shutter. I need to dig out those negs and make some prints. They look pretty damned good if I must say so myself, and I really didn't put that much effort into it.

Not to mention the fact that I think using el cheapo ruskie knock off cameras puts some of the child like fun back into photography...kinda like a Holga.


----------



## neea (Mar 1, 2007)

30 seconds is quite a long time when the shutters open.
I sit there ready to panick 'OMG ITS STUCK' then Click!
30 seconds feels like forever.

But I guess it depends how much blur you want to.
You can get blur in under a second and definatley at 30 seconds.


----------



## Efergoh (Mar 1, 2007)

But, it may not be blur that you're going for.

Perhaps you're shooting moving water and you want the water to look glassy, or you're shooting a landscape and you want the movement of the clouds to streak across the scene. 30 seconds just isn't enough.


----------



## LaFoto (Mar 1, 2007)

Well, the effect jonas is looking for is that of staightforward night photography ,and not star trails, for example, as I can tell from an answer he gave over in someone else's thread. And that effect can definitely also be achieved with a compact digital camera.


----------



## PhotoHeather (Mar 2, 2007)

I have gotten some fun shots out of this camera I picked up in Europe:

http://shop.lomography.com/shop/

(About a 1/4 of the way down the page select the "ColorSplash" Camera.  After the page pulls up you will see tabs on the upper portion of the page... select "Shots" to see examples of photos taken with this camera.)

While it is complete junk (seriously) it is fun to play around with.  I have taken some great pictures out at night with it and if I lose it I wouldn't shed a tear.  The colored flashes add a fun dynamic.  It is about $50.00 on Amazon.com.

ETA: If you do buy this crappy camera... (yet I still have a place in my heart for it) here is a great "tips" section to check out.  http://www.lomography.com/tips/  Click on the white ColorSplash camera at the bottom of the page.  It will have tips but more importantly pictures that will help you decide if it is the type of camera you are looking for.  Of interest to you would be #4 under "Tasks and Techniques" titled "Long Exposure with No Flash"


----------



## Aquarium Dreams (Mar 3, 2007)

Efergoh said:


> Again, I point to long exposure being measured in minutes, not seconds. Even if we go with seconds, both my 35mm SLR, and my DSLR only go to 30 seconds, then to Bulb. Since neither of them can accept a cable release, the bulb setting is useless to me because I fear that holding the shutter for longer than 30 seconds (or even 10 seconds) will yield camera shake.
> 
> I've never seen an SLR or a DSLR with a T setting for the shutter. For those who don't know, T = Time. With the Bulb setting, the shutter will remain open for as long as you hold it open. With T or Time, you fire the shutter release once to open the shutter, and again to close it. You don't have to sit there and hold it open.



Are you sure that your dslr won't take a remote control?  My Canon doesn't take a remote cable, but it definitely takes a remote control.  What you said about the T setting made me wonder, so I put my camera on Bulb and pressed the remote control button once, and released the button.  The shutter stayed open until I pressed the button on the remote again, just like it would on a T setting.  Whether or not it would yield decent star trails (considering noise) is another matter.

This is the Bloc Party cover Jonas is talking about, with the photo by Rut Blees Luxemburg:

[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Weekend-City-Bloc-Party/dp/B000M06K5C[/ame]

Good album.


----------



## LaFoto (Mar 3, 2007)

Ah, good to see the photo Jonas is talking about at last.
Well, that one does not look like a photo for which anyone would need to go on longer exposure times than 30 seconds at the most. Even less would do. So actually there is no need to become more academic than necessary when Jonas is only looking for some pointers at "normal" (what ever is "normal", but ... you know...) night photography.


----------



## Efergoh (Mar 3, 2007)

Aquarium Dreams said:


> What you said about the T setting made me wonder, so I put my camera on Bulb and pressed the remote control button once, and released the button.  The shutter stayed open until I pressed the button on the remote again, just like it would on a T setting.  Whether or not it would yield decent star trails (considering noise) is another matter.



Certainly worthy of exploration. Not like you're going to waste film or anything.
But, as I've mentioned before, long exposure and digital don't mesh really well for the reason you already mentioned (noise).

Might be worth a roll of 35mm to take a peek at what it would do.


----------



## xfloggingkylex (Mar 3, 2007)

Efergoh said:


> Again, I point to long exposure being measured in minutes, not seconds. Even if we go with seconds, both my 35mm SLR, and my DSLR only go to 30 seconds, then to Bulb. *Since neither of them can accept a cable release*, the bulb setting is useless to me because I fear that holding the shutter for longer than 30 seconds (or even 10 seconds) will yield camera shake.
> 
> I've never seen an SLR or a DSLR with a T setting for the shutter. For those who don't know, T = Time. With the Bulb setting, the shutter will remain open for as long as you hold it open. With T or Time, you fire the shutter release once to open the shutter, and again to close it. You don't have to sit there and hold it open.
> 
> ...


 
dont be silly, there is a cable release for you minolta 5D here
http://www.adorama.com/CZDRA100.html

the alpha and the 5d are pretty much the same camera platform


----------



## Alex_B (Mar 3, 2007)

Hm, I have to confirm that long exposure (the one you count in minutes, not seconds), really goes well with dSLRs and cable release. With some cable releases you can lock the shutter release and the shutter will be open until you unlock. so you do not have to press it all the time.

Did some shots over new year with ND filters, really long exposures, and noise was not a major issue.
 There will be hot pixels on your sensor, true, but those are single pixel so they are easily dealt with (either with in camera software or in post processing). Unfortunately my experiments dissappeared with the death of the laptop where I stored them in the UK. But I will do proper shootings this way soon and post the results.


----------



## jonas (Mar 3, 2007)

interesting much food for thought there guys..im looking at my dads camera at the moment. its a point and shoot i guess..Nikon Coolpix L1. Cant seem to find the f settings. actually theres a feature in the menu called Exposure comp. and it goes from -2.0 up to 2.0 ?


----------



## Aquarium Dreams (Mar 4, 2007)

Efergoh said:


> Certainly worthy of exploration. Not like you're going to waste film or anything.
> But, as I've mentioned before, long exposure and digital don't mesh really well for the reason you already mentioned (noise).
> 
> Might be worth a roll of 35mm to take a peek at what it would do.



I've been looking to buy a 35mm film camera that will take either a cable release or a remote so I can experiment with star trails.  My Canon K2 takes neither.  Although, now that you mentioned it, I seem to remember having an old brownie with a cable release around here somewhere and a couple 120 rolls in the fridge...


----------



## Garbz (Mar 5, 2007)

I have seen plenty of examples of long exposures with even entry level D70s (and by long I do mean several minutes) and they looked just fine.

I myself have taken 120minute exposures of the stars on my D200 no problem. Noise does become an issue though and the noise reduction is less then perfect with these lengths yielding black dots.

I will investigate different methods to do NR shortly for long nightime shots and will post my results. This will happen next week to all who are interested.


----------



## jonas (Apr 26, 2007)

hey there. its been a while since ive active on the forum, college exams keeping me busy. so i was doing some tidyimg up of my bedroom and relocated my old digital camera ..which i had pretty much forgotten about and written off. However it seems to be a bit groovier than i origianally assummed. Its a Canon Powershot S400( digital Elph). Thing is i think it could be just the job for the type of photography ive been talking about. Its got a fair amount of manual features , well by that i mean you can mes around with the settings quite a bit. Unfortunatley i bought it in a dodgy store and it was second hand and ive got no instruction manual. Its got iso and exposure settings..I was messing around with it last night and it seems appropriate. i got light trails and my night time photos looked promising. What setting would you suggest?


----------



## Kipper (Apr 26, 2007)

Efergoh said:


> I've never seen an SLR or a DSLR with a T setting for the shutter.


 
From memory the Nikon D50 does. You can configure the remote to open the shutter with one press and closed with a second. I tried it a couple of times when I first got it.

On the subject of old technology, I found some pictures the other day that were taken with my old Zenit 12xp aaaah simpler times, happy days....


----------



## jonas (Apr 27, 2007)

well i found some info on my camera on the net..it seems to be a promising enough camera. i thought it may be useless


----------



## Weaving Wax (Apr 27, 2007)

I have a 35mm camera and I've done exposures up to a minute and they turned out great. 












And I had no problem with it. I think these pictures turned out well. (the scans are crap. Thanks Wolf Camera and CVS), but they worked fine with my camera, tripod and shutter release cable. 

With film you'll have to watch for Reciprocity Failure. Which is the intensity of light reaching the film and the time it is allowed to act on it. With long exposures it can become underexposed and denisity loss...


----------



## reshp1 (Apr 27, 2007)

The shot the OP linked to can easily be achieved with a DSLR. Here's a 30 second shot. I don't think you'd have a problem until you get into the hour range.


----------



## smyth (Apr 28, 2007)

jonas said:


> interesting much food for thought there guys..im looking at my dads camera at the moment. its a point and shoot i guess..Nikon Coolpix L1. Cant seem to find the f settings. actually theres a feature in the menu called Exposure comp. and it goes from -2.0 up to 2.0 ?


 
go to the scene modes, and choose fireworks. it's relatively short in the world of long exposures, but it will work


----------



## jonas (Sep 4, 2007)

thanks for that..Ive been away for way too long.


----------



## jonas (Sep 4, 2007)

i'll upload some of my photos either today or tomorrow..And  will take all feedback on board , positive or otherwise!


----------

