One long or many exposures??

Discussion in 'Exposure Discussion' started by BWGirl, Oct 13, 2004.

  1. BWGirl

    BWGirl Member

    Messages:
    3,049
    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Location:
    Wisconsin, U
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi!
    I noticed, Leon, that you did some sort of multiple exposure for your waterfall pictures. You attributed this technique to Les, if I am not mistaken. So if either of you or anyone else who understands this technique could help me out, I'd really appreciate it! :D

    Here are my questions....why did you do multiple exposures? What is this method (ie..how do you do it)? Is there a time when this method is better than a single long exposure?

    Thanks in advance, oh great masters!
    signed "Grasshopper"
     
  2. Jim Moore

    Jim Moore Member

    Messages:
    957
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Location:
    Iowa
    Shooter:
    Large Format
  3. BWGirl

    BWGirl Member

    Messages:
    3,049
    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Location:
    Wisconsin, U
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks, Jim!! It certainly does!
    Jeanette
     
  4. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,035
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Actually this technique of fragmented exposures is excellent when used carefully.

    It can be seen at it's best in the work of John Blakemore who devised the method for his landscapes in the late 1970's.

    See:
    http://photography.about.com/library/dop/bldop_jblake.htm
    http://www.hoopersgallery.co.uk/exhibition.htm

    Les is merely describing the techniques he picked up from John himself.
     
  5. bjorke

    bjorke Member

    Messages:
    2,032
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Location:
    SF & Surroun
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Multiple exposures lets you discard all that "Decisive Moment" claptrap and build up images as you see fit.

    Here's a Sample

    or more abstractly

    or with strobe pops and a long exposure:

    [​IMG]

    I personally prefer between 20 and 40 exposures per frame, so I rate new Velvia at around ISO 3200 and have at it.
     
  6. garryl

    garryl Member

    Messages:
    542
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Location:
    Fort Worth,
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I just want to know, if this is of a single subject(e.g. landscape), how you avoided violating the "law of Intermittence"?
     
  7. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,035
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Not sure what you mean but actually in John Blakemore's early images it's the intermittance as apposed to a continous long exposure thats important.

    When you watch a tree in the breeze you see the jerky movement as the wind pulses, his images (many published in 1996 in Inscape) convey this, he might make up a 2 minute exposure with one of a 1/15 seconds, more at an 1/8 some at a 1/30th etc, the combinations are endless.

    The image on this site's homepage by Les McLean is not the best example of the technique as its not far different to the result from a continuos exposure. That may be a little harsh as we are ony seeing a low res version.

    I have used the technique myself and it produces amazing images, if I had a larger scanner I'd scan an exhibition print but at 20"x30" it's too large for an A4 scanner.

    Now coming more upto date John Blakemore has still been using similar techniques for still life images, adding and subtracting obects during the exposures . . . .
     
  8. garryl

    garryl Member

    Messages:
    542
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Location:
    Fort Worth,
    Shooter:
    35mm
    The "law of intermittence" states that several short exposures will not produce the same density as one long continuous exposure.

    4 exposures of 1/4 second does not equal an exposure of 1 full second of a object.
    However I see that your trying to show change of movement, so we can esthically
    ignore the law- I guess.
     
  9. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,035
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yes so you allow a bit but it isn't much if the base subjects the same, it's different when its multiple exposures of different subjects.
     
  10. Les McLean

    Les McLean Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,609
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2002
    Location:
    Northern Eng
    Shooter:
    Multi Format


    Just to put the record straight Ian, I was doing the multiple exposure thing a couple of years before I had seen John's work and several years before I met him. As a matter of interest I have spent part of this week with John in Hoopers Gallery hanging his forthcomming show and we had a long discussion about the effects of multiple exposures for John didn't think that lots of multiple exposures where any different from one long exposure. I explained the differences and he concured. If you can make it to the Hoopers Gallery in the next month the show is worth seeing, there are 38 prints of his early landscape photography including a number of multiple exposures on both water and trees.
     
  11. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,035
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Like you Les I also used the multiple exposure techniques before I met John, but although I'd only seen early published work I'd heard of the technique he was using in various UK magazines..

    I did place a link to the Hoopers Gallery exhibition earlier in this thread.