Wind movement in scenes especially with large format photography

[MartyNL]

You see and hear photographers waiting hours until the wind has died down to just about non-existent before pressing the shutter release. So much so, that you'd think it has become an endurance sport! :)

And I even catch myself doing it, from time to time! But is it really necessary?

I'm wondering where this aesthetic has come from or if it's just a vestige of a time and era when materials were much slower than today?

Personally, I really don't mind some photographic blur and often find a completely static scene too contrived and stilted. And by the same token, I recognise that there are always exceptions such as water reflections or a detail study etc.
But generally speaking, with this practice, are we not doing ourselves and our scenes a disservice by abandoning a sense of motion and naturalness?
Is it not time for LF photographers to embrace the elements, stop faffing and use their time more wisely, like, take more pictures!

[j.e.simmons]

When I shot 8x10 with a shutterless lens and everything at f64 and 1 second or more, I included the word wind in my titles, i.e., Live Oaks and Wind, Little Talbot Island.

[Richard Wasserman]

I've always liked the effects of wind in landscape photos and have often used the slowest possible shutter speed to that end

[Alan9940]

I don't mind the look of wind in my photos, but I choose a shutter speed long enough to make the movement obvious in the final print. A little bit of blurriness just makes it look like you didn't focus properly, etc. IMO, anyway.

[Bruce Watson]

You see and hear photographers waiting hours until the wind has died down to just about non-existent before pressing the shutter release. So much so, that you'd think it has become an endurance sport! :)

And I even catch myself doing it, from time to time! But is it really necessary?

It is not really necessary. Photography isn't really necessary. Art isn't really necessary. People do it, or don't do it, because that's what they want. Other peoples' choices are not under our control. Difficult as that might be to accept, we just have to learn to live with it.

[Dugan]

I don't mind the look of wind in my photos, but I choose a shutter speed long enough to make the movement obvious in the final print. A little bit of blurriness just makes it look like you didn't focus properly, etc. IMO, anyway.

I agree.
Wind motion in a photo is sorta like water motion...
Not enough, it looks like you didn't focus properly.
Too much, it looks 'overblown'...
It's a Goldilocks predicament. :)

[CreationBear]

If you’ve not already, check out John Blakemore’s work—conveying the effects of motion in both wind and water was a preoccupation of his in many of his series.

[Doremus Scudder]

If you don't want wind motion in your image, then you have to do something. Waiting works sometimes. There are other work-arounds like rethinking the image so you can use a larger aperture and a faster shutter speed. If the wind is coming in gusts, you can sometimes do a series of shorter exposures when things are still and build up to the final, longer, exposure (I use this for people and vehicles too).

Of course, we can rethink the image to include the movement. Or come back later, or just not make the exposure in the first place.

What matters is the image you're after.

Doremus

[Vaughn]

...
What matters is the image you're after. Doremus

[Heroique]

Vaughn, a beautiful shot using breeze to your advantage.

Your subject matter is so light and delicate, it may never have a moment of stillness!

Have you ever returned to try?

[Heroique]

In my younger and less-experienced years, I didn’t understand forest winds very well.

For example, I didn’t know some winds never subside, no matter the patience, curses, prayers, magic incantations, or timing of the visit.

Here’s an example where I waited (and waited) for the mountain wind to stop moving the hanging branches above the creek. I needed a slow shutter speed to impart a touch of motion to the water. Of course, the wind here is due to the creek’s moving current. The wind here will never subside ... unless the creek dries up or freezes over.

239889

I want those five hours of my youth and innocence back. :(

Tachi 4x5
Fuji A 240mm/9
½ sec. @ f/32
T-Max 100 in T-Max rs
Epson 4990/Epson Scan

[Alan Klein]

In my younger and less-experienced years, I didn’t understand forest winds very well.

For example, I didn’t know some winds never subside, no matter the patience, curses, prayers, magic incantations, or timing of the visit.

Here’s an example where I waited (and waited) for the mountain wind to stop moving the hanging branches above the creek. I needed a slow shutter speed to impart a touch of motion to the water. Of course, the wind here is due to the creek’s moving current. The wind here will never subside ... unless the creek dries up or freezes over.

239889

I want those five hours of my youth and innocence back. :(

Tachi 4x5
Fuji A 240mm/9
½ sec. @ f/32
T-Max 100 in T-Max rs
Epson 4990/Epson Scan

So how do you know which winds subside and those that don't?

[Jody_S]

A little bit of blurriness just makes it look like you didn't focus properly.

Agreed. 1/30 or above, or 1s or more. In between, only on perfectly still days or sheltered in deep woods.

[Heroique]

So how do you know which winds subside and those that don't?

Alan, by spending lots of time in the woods like Natty Bumppo. ;^)

[Vaughn]

Vaughn, a beautiful shot using breeze to your advantage.

Your subject matter is so light and delicate, it may never have a moment of stillness!

Have you ever returned to try?

No. In fact, I'd be hard pressed to remember the exact spot on Hwy 299 east of here. Along the Trinity River, somewhere.

8x10 carbon print

But photographing in the redwoods for years, one gets to know when the wind will die down...or not. When the down-canyon breezes slow down and before the up-canyon breezes takes their place, there can be a time of still air. Between storms. The vertical (8x10 carbon print) was a two-minute exposure. My boys did a good job of holding still, too. The 4x10 carbon print -- I took a little nap during that exposure.

[PatrickMarq]

239926
239927
Wind can have an interesting vibe.

[Alan Klein]

This thread has me thinking I ought to switch from Tmax 100 to 400.

[ic-racer]

I really like the work of Dick Arnetz:

239931

[Drew Wiley]

Here it's windy most of the time, unless one is sheltered behind a ridge. One simply gets accustomed to it, and learns to precisely anticipate the gusts by watching grass and leaves, and by what clouds overhead are doing in relation to the position of the sun. But this year it's been exceptionally windy, so my large format "kites" haven't gotten as much use as MF gear. When I want deliberate motion of grass or trees adjacent to immobile detail like rocks, I'll try to find a spot beside a large tree or rock to station my camera itself sheltered from the gusts, and then put a strong contrast filter over the lens to slow down the exposure appreciably, then wait for the right effect. A deep blue 47 filter opens up the shadows yet darkens greens much like old blue-sensitive plates, and lends an especially distinct look.

More often I want the majority of the composition tightly detailed, yet with just a hint of being "wind-alive", with just a few tiny sections of grass or leaves in motion. Same with flowing water. One doesn't necessarily need to go to one extreme versus the other. How long to wait? All depends. But in the woods, it doesn't take all that long before the intricate light and shadow patterns change entirely; and recomposition each time with a view camera imposes more delay. Frustrating, or a cat and mouse thrill? The latter to me, even if I don't catch the mouse every time.

[jnantz]

When I shot 8x10 with a shutterless lens and everything at f64 and 1 second or more, I included the word wind in my titles, i.e., Live Oaks and Wind, Little Talbot Island.

that's perfect !

I shoot very slow shutter speeds all the time too. these days about 15-30 seconds an exposure
I don't include the wind in my titles though, that's a great idea! I figure the wind is there might as well accept it move on ..

[j.e.simmons]

that's perfect !

I figure the wind is there might as well accept it move on ..

That's my thinking, too.

[sanking]

That's my thinking, too.

Movement in nature can work for you as well as against you.

Dick Arentz made a photo once with a 12X20 camera inside a large building where chickens were raised, printed as palladium print. The long exposure of several seconds shows the white chickens as a blur as they run around in front of the camera. I wanted to make the same type of image but those type of buildings where chickens were raised that were at one time common in the south have pretty much disappeared.

Sandy

[rdenney]

It depends on how one visualizes the scene.

I waited a good while for the dangling vines to pause for this one, but it wouldn’t have matched my visualization for them to be blurred.

https://www.rickdenney.com/missions_in_4x5/espadaaqueduct1991.jpg
Espada Acequia Aqueduct, 1991. FP4, 1/2 second at f/22.

Rick “usually interested in a sense of endless detail” Denney

[John Layton]

Sandy, while I'm sure that D. Arentz' "running chickens" photograph is stunning...the concept somehow does not sit quite as well with me personally as does P. Caponigro's "running deer." Oh well...horses (or chickens? or deer?) for courses, I guess!

[Scott Davis]

It depends on how one visualizes the scene.

I waited a good while for the dangling vines to pause for this one, but it wouldn’t have matched my visualization for them to be blurred.

https://www.rickdenney.com/missions_in_4x5/espadaaqueduct1991.jpg
Espada Acequia Aqueduct, 1991. FP4, 1/2 second at f/22.

Rick “usually interested in a sense of endless detail” Denney

I'd have loved to see a second version with the vines moving, but I suspect that they A: wouldn't have moved enough, and there aren't enough of them to do the idea justice. But well-seen and well-rendered.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

No. In fact, I'd be hard pressed to remember the exact spot on Hwy 299 east of here. Along the Trinity River, somewhere.

8x10 carbon print

But photographing in the redwoods for years, one gets to know when the wind will die down...or not. When the down-canyon breezes slow down and before the up-canyon breezes takes their place, there can be a time of still air. Between storms. The vertical (8x10 carbon print) was a two-minute exposure. My boys did a good job of holding still, too. The 4x10 carbon print -- I took a little nap during that exposure.

Vaughn, I love these two examples. Vaughn and I have worked in the redwoods together for some time now. There have been many times in the Southern Redwoods when Mother Nature holds her breath for us. My example is a fifteen minute exposure 8x20 carbon print.

[Maris Rusis]

It has been said, by Paul Strand I think, that a tree disturbed by a gust of wind will settle back as it was before the gust arrived. This exactly for every leaf, twig, and branch. I haven't done enough daylight time exposures to confirm this. Can anyone?

[Dugan]

In my experience, the wind only starts to blow when I pull the dark slide. :rolleyes:

[John Layton]

Funny thing I learned about Saguaro cacti many years back...that they can continue to resonate long after the wind dies down. Thing is...sometimes they'll resonate for a few seconds, then be absolutely still for a few more before resonating once more - the trick being to watch carefully and trip the shutter during a "non-resonant" phase (or not, depending on ones goals).

[Mark Sampson]

Maris Rusis, I've read that Strand used that technique. Certain of his nature close-ups from the 1920s suggest it; I'm thinking of a well-known image of a toadstool.
Dugan, you've described a law of nature.
John Layton, your discovery surprises me. I live surrounded by saguaros now; but the light here is generally so bright that long exposures are difficult. And I don't photograph in the late afternoon when the wind blows hard...

[Vaughn]

Two 4x5 negatives from the same day on the Eureka Valley Sand Dunes. Early in the day before the wind, and on top of the dunes with wind (sand blowing through scene.)

[Alan Klein]

Maris Rusis, I've read that Strand used that technique. Certain of his nature close-ups from the 1920s suggest it; I'm thinking of a well-known image of a toadstool.
Dugan, you've described a law of nature.
John Layton, your discovery surprises me. I live surrounded by saguaros now; but the light here is generally so bright that long exposures are difficult. And I don't photograph in the late afternoon when the wind blows hard...

That's a good point, Mark. Often the wind is calmer after sunrise than during the day when the sun's heating effect starts the wind blowing.

[Drew Wiley]

Well, the laws of nature don't necessarily obey the laws of Paul Strand or any of us. I've been playing cat and mouse with the intricate twigs and shadows of the redwoods and cloud forest fir trees for decades now; and quite often, once they do settle down, the specific lighting and compositional pattern itself will have changed, making re-composition with the ground glass necessary. I have better statistical odds using MF gear, but of course, prefer the greater textural potential of LF film.
In this area, including today, there is soft enveloping fog in the morning, and things are relatively motionless. Then around noon or so, the sun comes out, the contrast goes extreme in the woods, and there is some off and on wind gusts. Still, easier to manage than in unprotected areas, where the wind can be incessant this time of year, up till around mid-August. But climate change has made a lot of things schizophrenic and unpredictable.

But Death Valley and wind? Nope. Never want that again. The fine clay and blowing alkali dust gets into everything. Avoid the month of March like the plague.

[Ben Horne]

With my photography, I try to portray a sense of calm. Awkward movement of leaves would look more like a sloppy mistake and distract from the subject. If on the other hand one embraces the wind and perhaps uses a ND filter to further lengthen the exposure until the movement looks deliberate, then I'm good with it.

[SergeyT]

Movement in nature can work for you as well as against you.

Dick Arentz made a photo once with a 12X20 camera inside a large building where chickens were raised, printed as palladium print. The long exposure of several seconds shows the white chickens as a blur as they run around in front of the camera. I wanted to make the same type of image but those type of buildings where chickens were raised that were at one time common in the south have pretty much disappeared.

Sandy

Once I took a couple of photos of ocean cliffs and many-many seagulls taking off and landing onto those cliffs in a close proximity to my camera during dawn. Shutter speed measured in many seconds. Moving and flying seagulls created all sorts of interesting effects in the images, probably very similar to what was described above .

[SergeyT]

It has been said, by Paul Strand I think, that a tree disturbed by a gust of wind will settle back as it was before the gust arrived. This exactly for every leaf, twig, and branch. I haven't done enough daylight time exposures to confirm this. Can anyone?

In my experience of making color photographs by exposing 3 frames of B&W film on a scene - that is mostly true. "Mostly" because it is hard at times to get each of the 3 in a complete stillness (in between the gusts)

[Andrew O'Neill]

Yes, there was a time when I was quite anal about this. Over the last few years, if it's windy, it's windy. The wind can add a unique quality... sometimes. There still are times though when I want the leaves to behave! :D

[Andrew O'Neill]

...and I've noticed that it has become a bit more windier here over the last couple of years :confused:

[Alan Klein]

I think when just some of the leaves move is more annoying.

[Chuck Pere]

Locally I usually choose to go out photographing on calm days. When traveling you are often at a place on a windy day. In that case I just go with the flow but mostly use medium format. I'm just not that great at picking the right moment and roll film gives me a lot of choices. This is 4x5 though:

[Rod Klukas]

I always taught students: If you can't fight it join it.

So if there are no luffs, or pauses in the wind, then go even slower on shutter speed and incorporate the motion.

Paul Caponigro had a fantastic shot of running deer in southern France. And early work in the NorthEastern US.

http://www.photographywest.com/pages/caponigro_bio.html

Hope this helps.

Rod