Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Multiple Exposure Question

  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    SooooCal/LA USA
    Posts
    1,001

    Re: Multiple Exposure Question

    But what will the effect (on water) look like??? With enough exposures, it ends up looking murky, as there's only chopped (short) exposures, not enough time to build up proper (normal) highlights, and not enough collective "frames" to have a completed event image... With many exposures, it might start looking like a time exposure, as snapped elements start to join... Or something murky with something foggy over it...

    You might as well just get a heavy ND filter, as exposure + reciprocity are easily calculated, as one of the benefits is that in a body of moving water, different flow patterns tend to replicate, so with a long enough exposure, the patterns emerge and become visible...

    Actually doing some real tests reveal what the camera/film image "sees", rather than what we (think we) "want"... And do we like what we get???

    Test, test, test...

    Steve K

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Sheridan, Colorado
    Posts
    870

    Re: Multiple Exposure Question

    You don't need a calculator -- other than the one you have in your head. Just determine the correct exposure for a scene/subject, as you normally do. Then, determine the number of exposures you want to take. If nothing else, just guess. I first used this approach with a Minolta SLR that had double exposure capability, but a LOT of "double" exposures is a pain -- MUCH, MUCH easier with large format.

    Make sure your camera is secure to a steady tripod -- you don't want to waste a lot of time by having your camera move after 50 exposures.

    Then start "doubling" your exposures -- as far as you want to go. Every time you double the number of exposures, you simply switch to the next faster shutter speed:

    2 exposures = 1 shutter speed change
    4 exposures = 2 shutter speed change
    8 exposures = 3 shutter speed change
    16 exposures = 4 shutter speed change
    etc.

    Pretty simple. If you run out of shorter shutter speeds, add NDX filters -- BEFORE you start, of course.

    Sure, the intermittency effect exists, but it depends on how bright your subject is as well as how many exposures you take. The darker the subject and the more exposures, the more compensation you will need. My experience? Find something more important to worry about -- like being struck by lightning. You are more likely to run out of "a next faster shutter speed" or "time" before you need to worry about intermittency. And even if it is there -- to whatever extent -- you might like the effect. My best results were taken on Long Island Sound, shortly after sunset with Kodachrome 25 and colored filters. I did not even attempt to guess at how much to compensate for intermittency.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	bean.JPG 
Views:	6 
Size:	18.7 KB 
ID:	170432

    The effects will be different depending on how many exposures you take. The more you take, the more it will be like a single LONG exposure, but still will be different. And remember that you can make other changes inbetween exposures, such as filtration changes, which you can't do with a single LONG exposure. Once again, you are only limited by your imagination.
    Last edited by xkaes; 2-Oct-2017 at 10:37.

  3. #23
    Jac@stafford.net's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Winona, Minnesota
    Posts
    4,079

    Re: Multiple Exposure Question

    Thanks to all who corrected me. I went so far afield I got lost.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Seoul
    Posts
    104

    Re: Multiple Exposure Question

    Quote Originally Posted by IanBarber View Post
    This is exactly what I am trying to achieve. So going back to my initial question, do I have the maths right in order to calculate the number of required exposures
    Fixed it Unless you are an American exiled in Doncaster, in which case please accept my apologies.

    About the original question, why not make two negatives (one with split exposure) and see if you can spot a difference (in negative density, not in the waves or whatnot). Also check which prints better.
    Peter

Similar Threads

  1. Multiple Exposure Calculations
    By RmFrase in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 22-Mar-2012, 16:47
  2. Multiple exposure..The same from InCamera and Photoshop??
    By johndesq125 in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 4-Nov-2009, 10:47
  3. Multiple exposure of still life with different apertures
    By arkady n. in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2-Feb-2009, 14:38
  4. Double exposure - multiple exposure
    By cyrus in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 20-Jun-2007, 12:43
  5. multiple exposure techniques
    By emanuele mora in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-Sep-2001, 17:52

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •