Long Exposure Beach Scene

[PhotoByTrace]

Hi all,
I got out to my local beach again with my camera over the (extended) weekend. I didn't have a scene in mind was just looking for something to "grab" me. I found this sandbar with what I thought were quite interesting corrugations, so decided to try to capture it. After taking a few shots with just a 2 stop RGND filter, I decided I wanted a long exposure to smooth the water and sky to try to have the textures in the sandbar stand out. I wasn't totally happy with my composition on Friday morning even though the sky was quite dramatic; so tried again Saturday morning.

Friday morning:
Normal exposure f/13 1/50sec 16mm ISO 200 (2 stop Rev GND)


Long exposure f/9 20secs 16mm ISO 200 (2 stop Rev GND + 10 stop ND)


Saturday morning:
Long exposure f/11 53secs 16mm ISO 400 (2 stop Rev GND + 10 stop ND)


Long exposure f/11 30secs 16mm ISO250 (2 stop Rev GND + 10 stop ND)


As always, any and all feedback is welcomed.

[Marie Hass]

Dear Trace,

It is interesting to see the differences in exposures and the effect on the images.

Thank you for posting these.

Marie

[wilgk]

Very interesting to see the changes, I too like the sand pattern, perhaps even just the sand and sea as a different crop viewpoint.

[FootLoose]

I would have been happy with the first two, Trace, but I think the 3rd one is exceptional. Well done for persisting with it and experimenting.

[deetheturk]

Great captures Trace,thanks for sharing!

[Colin Southern]

Hi Trace,

Good stuff

Keep in mind that with shots like this, the elevation of the camera changes things a LOT (especially so with a wide-angle lens) - perhaps next time you might also like to experiment with getting the camera lower to the ground and see how aggressive you can make the ripples look?

[IzzieK]

Agree with Greg....Love #3 very much. I seldom like long exposures on the water as some are overdone but your #3 shot is very very pleasing to the eyes...at least MY eyes...

[Shadowman]

Very nice.

[PhotoByTrace]

Thanks all for the feedback; much appreciated!

And Colin, I absolutely agree. I also wanted to get lower but at the time decided it wasn't worth the risk.

The tripod and I were in the water. I was kneeling in about a foot of water by my lost shot, it was an incoming king tide on the new moon. With all that going through my head I decided to be safe rather than sorry on this occasion.

[Colin Southern]

The tripod and I were in the water. I was kneeling in about a foot of water by my lost shot, it was an incoming king tide on the new moon. With all that going through my head I decided to be safe rather than sorry on this occasion.

Wimp

Get a pair of waders and keep shooting girl!

This is how Joe McNally does it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23kcMySgpzg

[PhotoByTrace]

LOL! I do believe I was already lower than Joe

[Downrigger]

Fun to examine - nice contribution.
For some reason - movement blur in the near clouds is attractive to me but the cumulus far distant looks better crisp and anchored to crisp forms at the horizon. Not sure what that's about but it leaves me liking #2 best.

[Ken MT]

How about this?

No tripod though

[PhotoByTrace]

LOL! Oh, my... I'm figuring it was cold water.
My water is nice and warm, but the possibility of stingers is real, so I do wear full length leggings and beach shoes.
So the picture is getting closer. Have the photog kneeling with water up to hips and add a tripod and you are about there

[Sponge]

For me I like the first the best even though you've got the horizon smack-dab in the middle. I'd probably crop a little of the sky off to bring more emphasis to the nice lines and textures in the sand. By the second pic I think the sun is too high up and the clouds aren't blurred enough, especially the distant ones that still have their general form intact.
In the 3rd and 4th pics I don't think the water is interesting enough to demand so much space or attention and the portrait orientation on the 3rd doesn't convince me either although I think it could work if there was more sand and the clouds were a little more interesting. I don't want to sound negative since you've captured some nice pictures and I think there's some potential in the scene. Just my observations

[Brownbear]

Beautiful and as all your photos are, filled with gorgeous light.

I like the first image the best for the composition and the clouds and colour, followed very closely by #3 for the gorgeous shimmer on the water and the rich tones in the sand.

[IzzieK]

I totally agree with you...your place is very warm by comparison, in fact when comes winter...Victorians go to Queensland to get warm...

LOL! Oh, my... I'm figuring it was cold water.
My water is nice and warm, but the possibility of stingers is real, so I do wear full length leggings and beach shoes.
So the picture is getting closer. Have the photog kneeling with water up to hips and add a tripod and you are about there

[FootLoose]

LOL! Oh, my... I'm figuring it was cold water.
My water is nice and warm, but the possibility of stingers is real, so I do wear full length leggings and beach shoes.
So the picture is getting closer. Have the photog kneeling with water up to hips and add a tripod and you are about there

For those not fortunate enough to live in Australia: when Queenslanders refer to "stingers" they mean things that can kill you pdq. http://www.tourismwhitsundays.com.au...r-information/

[Ken MT]

He wasn't kneeling he was standing! and he is an Australian.

[Colin Southern]

How about this?

No tripod though

Ha - when I did this shot the water was higher than that - I had the camera on a tripod - camera bad tied shorter and shorter as the tide came in - I had d*ckheads on a Jetski beining encouraged to "get the cameraman get the cameraman" - and their d*ckhead mates who dropped a rock off the platform I was under (landed about 18" away from the camera).

Still got the shot!