Learning Landscapes - Water Fountain Test Silky Water

[Brownbear]

One day I would like to manage a beautiful image of a waterfall in the forest with silky water, and with that goal in mind I tried to achieve a silky water effect on a water fountain, even though the light was poor.

Right now I'm exploring the Aperture priority mode on my camera and auto iso to better understand the relationship between Aperture, SS, ISO and exposure compensation. (photographed with a Sigma 18-50 mm lens)

I chose the smallest aperture (for the slowest shutter speed)

F36 - SS chosen 1/6 second ISO 1600 Exposure compensation +.67 to move the histogram a bit more to the right for better light.

I focused on the last water spout hoping for sharp focus on this one (and to draw the eye into the image) and for sufficient DOF... However my water is not silky and beautiful as I envisioned and the water spouts are also not sharp as I envisioned.



At larger apertures up to F11 (iso 720, exp. comp -33 (to avoid clipping the water) the water was too frozen and the image is too ugly to post.

How could I have managed a nicer shot of this image using manual mode, based on the information my camera chose in aperture priority? There does not seem to be much room for a slower shutter speed 1/2 or Bulb mode?

A larger aperture then F36 (no worries for adequate DOF) would have allowed for more light and a lower iso (better quality), but I likely would have experienced challenges not clipping the water.

Thank you.

[Manfred M]

A couple of suggestions for you. Silky water effects usually are shot on a tripod, small aperture and a low ISO to give you a long shutter speed (cover the viewfinder too so that the extraneous light does not affect the exposure). Neutral density filters are often used as well to cut down on the amount of light entering the camera.

Your ISO 1600 is working against what you are trying to do; crank that down as low as you can.

[Brownbear]

Thank you Manfred. On my next try I will set the iso myself and a smaller aperture (any suggestions for apertures to start with).

I wanted a low angle and my tripod does not go that low so I place my camera on the cement base surrounding the fountain, holding it very steady... I thought that would be stable enough to prevent any camera movement?

[Mike Buckley]

Your ISO 1600 is working against what you are trying to do; crank that down as low as you can.

This is a situation, Christina, that you should not be using Auto ISO unless you set its maximum ISO value at your camera's lowest ISO value, which defeats the purpose of using Auto ISO. In this case, disable Auto ISO and, as Manfred explains, leave your camera set to its lowest ISO value.

As you can see, by strictly using Aperture Priority, Auto ISO and exposure compensation, you have already learned something new that is very important.

Set the aperture according to the depth of field that you want. If that setting doesn't result in a shutter speed that is slow enough, use a polarizer, as that will reduce the light by about 1 1/2 to 2 stops. Or use a neutral density filter.

The water spouts themselves are never going to appear sharp because there is too much water or at least moisture between them and your camera.

[Mike Buckley]

When you post images using Auto ISO, we can help you better if you also post your maximum ISO and minimum shutter speed values. It's insufficient to explain that you used Auto ISO.

[Brownbear]

Thank you for expanding...

Yes.

I will try it again and I do plan to invest in some polarizes and ND filters.

I don't understand why the water spouts could not be sharp. If a bird or person was in the fountain and I focused on them, I'm pretty sure they would be sharp and the surrounding water would be blurred. ie; I don't understand why.

Thank you.

This is a situation, Christina, that you should not be using Auto ISO unless you set its maximum ISO value at your camera's lowest ISO value, which defeats the purpose of using Auto ISO. In this case, disable Auto ISO and, as Manfred explains, leave your camera set to its lowest ISO value.

As you can see, by strictly using Aperture Priority, Auto ISO and exposure compensation, you have already learned something new that is very important.

Set the aperture according to the depth of field that you want. If that setting doesn't result in a shutter speed that is slow enough, use a polarizer, as that will reduce the light by about 1 1/2 to 2 stops. Or use a neutral density filter.

The water spouts themselves are never going to appear sharp because there is too much water or at least moisture between them and your camera.

[Mike Buckley]

Another thought about Auto ISO: There is perhaps a reason to use it when the camera is stabilized on a tripod or using some other method, but I can't immediately think of when that would be off the top of my head.

The whole point of using Auto ISO is to set the minimum shutter speed so you can handhold the focal length you are using or to stop the action, whichever requires the fastest shutter speed. Once you have met that criterion, you can then set the maximum ISO you are willing to use that allows your minimum shutter speed to occur while hopefully not creating too much noise.

So, while you are on your current quest to master the combination of using Aperture priority, Auto ISO and exposure compensation, do that only when you are hand holding the camera. Otherwise, use only Aperture priority and exposure compensation.

[Manfred M]

I'm not sure if your focus / DoF is dead on, but the main reason your water spouts are not 100% sharp is that the water is moving over them. Wrapped in moving water, they are also affected by the slow shutter speed.

[Mike Buckley]

I don't understand why the water spouts could not be sharp. If a bird or person was in the fountain and I focused on them, I'm pretty sure they would be sharp and the surrounding water would be blurred. ie; I don't understand why.

When referring to the technical issue of sharpness and when viewing the image at 100%, you are absolutely correct. However, if there is a sufficient amount of blurred water between you and the subject, the overall appearance of the subject will appear blurred.

To further clarify this, imagine photographing a person standing behind a window screen. Though it's possible to keep the person sharply focused and to blur the screen, the screen is made up of so many details that the person will not appear sharp in a normal viewing situation.

[Polar01]

Christina:auto ISO works against you, you adjust the "A" in this case to get a slow shutter however the auto ISO of the camera adjusts it to what it thinks. Forget auto ISO it is a royal pain to landscapers, set it to 100 and be done with it, you can aways rise it manually if and when you need it.
Remember with "A" and using auto ISO you camera changes both the shutter speed and ISO depending on the light that is two items always changing. Now if using "A" and an set ISO of say 100 as light conditions change the only thing that will change depending on the light is shutter speed.
Now Manfred talks about cover the viewfinder, this will prevent light from leaking in, however I have found that I did not need to do this when using my c-crop D7000 even on exposures up to and pass 5 minutes, that said my FX camera a D600 needs to have the viewfinder shielded to prevent leakage.
When using "A" and a set ISO, as you adjust the aperture which increases or decrease the amount of light let in as a side effect of this is a change of depth of field the ONLY this that the camera adjusts is the shutter speed. You adjust one thing the camera adjusts on thing, the way you had it set, you adjust one thing the camera adjusts two things.
So to make is simple when in "A" set you ISO low, DO NOT USE AUTO ISO.

Cheers:

Allan

[Mike Buckley]

Allan,

Please review my posts about not using Auto ISO that you probably didn't read before posting. The reason I mention this is that Christina is on a mission to master the use of Aperture Priority, Auto ISO and exposure compensation largely if not entirely at my suggestion. She has now learned in the process not to use Auto ISO when using a tripod. However, to say that no landscape photo and no photos taken using Aperture priority should be shot using Auto ISO even when not using a tripod is unsound advice in my opinion, especially when she is on this particular mission.

[Brownbear]

Thanks Mike,

It was set at minimum SS of 1/S because I knew to blur the water that the SS would be low and at a max of 3200, just because.

When you post images using Auto ISO, we can help you better if you also post your maximum ISO and minimum shutter speed values. It's insufficient to explain that you used Auto ISO.

[Brownbear]

Thank you Manfred, Allan and Mike...

All understood and very helpful. As part of my learning exercise perhaps I will take the initial shots with aperture priority and auto iso, and then try the shot again with a set iso and/or manual to see if I can improve the image...

[Mike Buckley]

It was set at minimum SS of 1/S because I knew to blur the water that the SS would be low and at a max of 3200, just because.

"Just because" is an insufficient reason, and yes, I tell my wife that all the time.

Even though you now realize that using Auto ISO defeats the purpose of using a tripod and vice versa, think through your choice of a maximum ISO value of 3200. You were trying to ensure that your camera was using a slow shutter speed. Yet you selected a high ISO value when the only reason to use a high value is to ensure that your camera can use a fast shutter speed and still achieve a reasonably desirable exposure.

[Mike Buckley]

As part of my learning exercise perhaps I will take the initial shots with aperture priority and auto iso, and then try the shot again with a set iso and/or manual to see if I can improve the image...

Personally, I think that's reverting to your tendency to try 100 things at once that tends to be self-defeating. You know you can always use Aperture Priority, Auto ISO and exposure compensation, review the automated settings, and switch to manual using the settings that the camera automatically selected. However, what's the purpose?

[Mike Buckley]

One more thought about focusing on the water spout: If you were using any auto focus method, I doubt very seriously that your camera actually was able to focus on the spout even if you were using Live View. That's again because of the amount of water between the spout and the camera. The only way to truly get the spout in focus in that situation is probably to use manual focus.

Ironically, if you try that, you will probably see that there is so much water in the way that you may not be able to determine when the spout is in focus. If you can't determine that in such a controlled situation, you'll never view the photo in a normal viewing situation and come away thinking that the spout is in focus even if it is in focus.

[Brownbear]

Hi Mike,


I will be careful and try my best to stay focused and will only try on occasion, both to learn but also because I think manual may be the better choice sometimes (which will help me learn everything about my camera. For example if there was a black bear in the water at the base of a brightly lit waterfall I may wish to have less depth of field combined with the slowest shutter speed possible to achieve a silky waterfall. And even at 1/6 second chosen by my camera the water in this fountain is not silky beautiful like I have seen in images on this forum, so I would try a slower shutter speed perhaps 1/second or bulb mode as an experiment to see if I could manage both the silky water and exposing for the black bear properly. ie; just adding to my learning experience after I see what I learn from aperture priority.

Personally, I think that's reverting to your tendency to try 100 things at once that tends to be self-defeating. You know you can always use Aperture Priority, Auto ISO and exposure compensation, review the automated settings, and switch to manual using the settings that the camera automatically selected. However, what's the purpose?

[Brownbear]

I used single point auto focus, so next time around I will try manual focus. And also live view which I tried once but it didn't go well because my screen was too bright (I forgot the cover piece for the view finder)

Good to know. Thank you for sharing.

One more thought about focusing on the water spout: If you were using any auto focus method, I doubt very seriously that your camera actually was able to focus on the spout even if you were using Live View. That's again because of the amount of water between the spout and the camera. The only way to truly get the spout in focus in that situation is probably to use manual focus.

Ironically, if you try that, you will probably see that there is so much water in the way that you may not be able to determine when the spout is in focus. If you can't determine that in such a controlled situation, you'll never view the photo in a normal viewing situation and come away thinking that the spout is in focus even if it is in focus.

[Brownbear]

Also I'm wondering if it is better sometimes to just use a SS and Aperture that does not require exposure compensation. Because when I use exposure compensation I can see that it pushes the histogram either left or right (and the black and white points) to achieve a better exposure but I'm thinking this will effect the tones and quality of the photo? or perhaps not?

One more thought about focusing on the water spout: If you were using any auto focus method, I doubt very seriously that your camera actually was able to focus on the spout even if you were using Live View. That's again because of the amount of water between the spout and the camera. The only way to truly get the spout in focus in that situation is probably to use manual focus.

Ironically, if you try that, you will probably see that there is so much water in the way that you may not be able to determine when the spout is in focus. If you can't determine that in such a controlled situation, you'll never view the photo in a normal viewing situation and come away thinking that the spout is in focus even if it is in focus.

[Manfred M]

Exposure compensation is simply an override on the automatic exposure settings of your camera's light meter. Remember that your camera's reflective light meter "assumes" the scene has an "average" amount of light reflecting from it. If the scene is not average and seems to be over or under exposed, you need to compensate for this, and that is what exposure compensation is all about.

I would also make the same suggestion as Mike is making; adjust one variable at a time, to understand how that work. Until you know your equipment (and photography in general), it is the only way to learn.