Hartland Quay

[JohnC]

I drove down to Hartland Quay,North Devon yesterday to try out my 10-stop( B&W) ND filter. It was very windyI weighted the tripod down with my camera bag and held it too so it should have been steady.

1 minute f22 ISO 100(10-stop ND)


10secs. f16 ISO 100 (10-stop ND)


4 +3 ND f8 1 sec. ISO 100



1 sec. f8 4+3 ND. ISO 100.


There were some rock climbers there.





This is what was below her

[JohnC]

Looks like the wind caught the camera in photo 1. I was unable to delete it.

[TobyMac]

Nice shots, I really like 2 and 3. 3 has a bit of a creepy vibe going on like some haunted pirate ship should be coming up the beech, very awesome well done

[Bobobird]

I like 2 best.

[Donald]

First reaction to the first one was that it looked like it was shot with a pinhole camera.

The blacks are very black and it does impart a particular mood. But I don't know if this was your intention. Or perhaps it is a case of us having to remember all the 'normal' rules about exposure and the dynamic range of a scene, even when we're using a 10-stop ND.

But I find appealing as it is. There is a dream like (or should that be nightmarish) quality about it.

[Dizzy]

I liked #3 the best...accept that it looks like a bad place to be at high tide..

#1 has that "dark and stormy" feel to it, as does #2, and that's not a bad thing at all. The second one also looks to have some dust bunnies just above the horizon line, and on closer inspection I see smaller versions (baby bunnies?) on the top image.

As for the rock climbers...to use a British phrase...those folks are daft! Never saw the need to risk life and limb climbing stuff when we have 4-wheel drive so affordable these days.

Mike

[lizzy310]

I lived 15 years in Sedro Woolley before I came over to Coeur D'Alene. Lots of beautiful things to photograph there. We must be just about family coming from so close a place!

I liked #3 the best...accept that it looks like a bad place to be at high tide..

#1 has that "dark and stormy" feel to it, as does #2, and that's not a bad thing at all. The second one also looks to have some dust bunnies just above the horizon line, and on closer inspection I see smaller versions (baby bunnies?) on the top image.

As for the rock climbers...to use a British phrase...those folks are daft! Never saw the need to risk life and limb climbing stuff when we have 4-wheel drive so affordable these days.

Mike

[lizzy310]

John...I don't know why you wanted to delete them. I think it's very cool the way you used the filter and slowed it down. I want to try that at our local dam. They dam the river in the summer and then open the dam the rest of the year. There is a waterfall year round. I am going to go over there with a tripod and try out some different settings and see what they do. What is the difference between a B&W filter and making things B&W in Photoshop? Did I read somewhere that you can get a level for your camera? I am always a half bubble off plumb!

[JohnC]

Many thanks all - this response came as a surprise tbh. - Tobias is definitely right- we are are own worst enemies.

Donald-they first two do look sinister don't they I just saw them as being rather dour,I thought that as I looked over them after posting. I find that when I'm choosing the keepers -keepers for me means those that are marginally better than those that should be deleted right away lol...(I'm not really that bad, it's my dry sense of humour) anyway.. I think we may not see the photo as it really is because we're so wrapped up in it during editing ,then it's posted and we look again and think (well I do).. 'Ugh'. If I could have deleted number one I would have done so, so maybe it was lucky I couldn't see how to. I converted to B&W and used a LR option, B&W creative 1 that's what has given it the 'look' you see ,however having said that the original was only a marginally more exposed so I don't know quite what Creative 1 did.Looks to me lie it further exposed the whites and darkened the blacks which I could have done in the normal editing.

Liz..Thanks for the tip re, the level . I do have a mini square spirit level that was on the camera, I've recommend them a couple of times on here but even that didn't do the job but my position was very testing . I was on a very steep slope running down to the sand (in photo 3), it's a runway for the boats - the wind was blowing at about 25/30mph and gusting up to about 35-you can just about stand in wind at 40mph. but that's the limit. What happens on here, I find,is that if you want to edit text ,that's fine and you can delete a photo by taking out the text (above I meant I didn't know how to delete the whole post- you can't interchange or add another photo in edit ,in a reply,yes but not an edit which is what I tried to do with the out of true horizon photo,I just had to leave it.

I don't know what the difference is between shooting in B&W and shooting in colour and then converting it to B&W.i Photoshop, Aperture or Lightroom (the main three I think) Maybe someone on here can answer that for you.

To save you buying ND filters for your waterfall photo you could go there at dusk and start taking shots at f22,ISO 100. Just take a shot at 15 seconds,say and see how it turns out on your LCD,if it's underexposed try 20 seconds and if overexposed try 10 seconds-trial and error really.I don't do it from a shutter speed chart. You will of course need a remote and on your iPhone or iPod (I think everyone has one or the other or both) you have an illuminated timer. I used the' stop watch' on my iPod to time mine,it was easier than trying to select the time required on the 'timer' and easier than using the camera timer if you only needed to go to 30 seconds max..However, such photos can be taken in daylight -I took this one at a beach just along from where these photos were taken.

f22 .4 secs.(that's point 4) ISO 100 I used a tripod and remote and I must have used my polariser too. I didn't have grads nor ND's then so yes, definitely the polariser.It couldn't have been done otherwise,as you see the sky is blue.



Mike- the dust bunnies are tiny specks of dried salt particles off the sea spray. I couldn't wipe the filter because it would have scratched it and annoyingly, I'd left my water spray in the car.I realised that this would happen and had brought a small bottle full of tap water,then forgot to take it from the car.Ugh. It's amazing how strong winds throw you out -it's a struggle thinking tbh. I had a friend with me and he got caught out with a high energy wave in a receding tide in that spot you mentioned-it went over the top of his boots and later he found it had caused the legs his tripod to seize up, he had to wash them down at home and add WD-40 a fine oil spray, into the telescopic sections .Down by sea in a gale isn't the best place to be doing photography.

As for the climbers- it was worse (in my view) They had children with them with crash helmets on (no rope though) and just below me three were climbing up the very steep rock fac ,albeit not vertical as the one in the photo but they were only about 10/12 years old and the last child was struggling. There was an adult above them on the top of the 'cliff' and one below on the rocks/beach , there's not much sand there really only rocks but as I said to my friend if the child slipped, having an adult at the bottom would do nothing for him/her (two girls,one lad) My friend said he wouldn't have allowed his kids to do that. The rocks at the bottom were pretty nasty and still had sea foam on them and they were wet from the out-going tide which wasn't far away- 50 metres maybe. You can tell from my photos,I took them about an hour after that.