# Multiple Exposures?

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 3 123 Last
• 08-04-2004, 10:04 PM
PhotoTyler
Multiple Exposures?
How much do you underexpose for multiple exposure? How many stops for each extra shot?

I wanna take a bunch of multiple exposure stuff of the ocean, but i don't know how to expose for it.

Thanks for your help, i'm leaving tommorow morning, so i'd like to know quick if possible.
• 08-04-2004, 10:06 PM
Donald Miller
For each double exposure you reduce the indicated exposure by one stop.
• 08-04-2004, 10:10 PM
dlin
Hi,

I just tried this out recently, and it's fairly easy to calculate. As an example, if your metered reading suggests a 1/2 second exposure, you can build up the exposure by exposing 15 times at 1/30 sec (i.e. 15 x 1/30 = 1/2). You can use faster shutter speeds, but that will require many more exposures to build up to the final desired value. I don't believe there is any compensation to worry about until you get to much longer total exposure times.

Hope that helps,

Daniel

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhotoTyler
How much do you underexpose for multiple exposure? How many stops for each extra shot?

I wanna take a bunch of multiple exposure stuff of the ocean, but i don't know how to expose for it.

Thanks for your help, i'm leaving tommorow morning, so i'd like to know quick if possible.

• 08-04-2004, 10:21 PM
PhotoTyler
oooh! okay, that makes sense! thank you a lot, and thanks more for a quick response.
• 08-04-2004, 11:00 PM
Aggie
also some quick tricks for multi exposures. Anything against a light background has an etheral look, almost ghost like. Those against a dark background will stand out and be very sharp.
• 08-04-2004, 11:06 PM
Jim Moore
I've said it before and I'll say it again.......

Jim
• 08-05-2004, 03:35 AM
Les McLean
Quote:

Originally Posted by PhotoTyler
How much do you underexpose for multiple exposure? How many stops for each extra shot?

I wanna take a bunch of multiple exposure stuff of the ocean, but i don't know how to expose for it.

Thanks for your help, i'm leaving tommorow morning, so i'd like to know quick if possible.

Take a meter reading as normal with the lens fully stopped down. Decide which shutter speed you want to use, clearly it must be a faster shutter speed than indicated by the meter reading. To arrive at the number of exposures needed using the faster shutter speed divide the slower speed into the faster speed. For example, the meter reading is 1/4 second at f22 but you wish to use 1/125th second at f22, divide 125 by 4, the answer is 31 multiple exposures at 1/125th. As a check that the multiple exposure is correct first make single exposure using the metered reading and then make your multiple exposure. When the film is developed the two adjacent negatives should be almost identical in density.

I've used this method for nearly 30 years and found it very reliable. The image of Roughting Linn on the home page is a multiple exposure.
• 08-05-2004, 06:22 AM
PhotoTyler
Thank you guys! this will help a ton! you guys on here are the most helpful people on the interenet, especially in photogrpahy! Thanks!
• 08-05-2004, 09:44 AM
tbm
Multiple exposures
An easy method is to double the film speed for the first shot and double it again for the second. For example, if you are using, say, Delta 100, your first shot would be taken with your camera set at a film speed of 200, then you would change the camera film speed to 400 and shoot the second one. For a third exposure you would double the 400 to 800.

Several weeks ago I went out to shoot amongst a crowd of tourists with the intention of capturing some double and some triple exposures. I set the 180mm lens on my Leica R8 to f/4 and the metering to matrix. I pressed the button atop the R8 which prevents the film from advancing, thus allowing multiple exposures until it is released. The attached photo was obtained on Technical pan film. Since I was shooting Technical Pan at ISO 50 rather than 25, for the first exposure I doubled it to 100, for the second I doubled that to 200, and for the third I doubled that to 400. I had been laughing while watching people fiddling with the control buttons on their digital cameras, seeking help from others around them, observing many extending their fingers and arms all over the place, and banging into others as they went into a semi coma attempting to use their tiny digtal camera displays and viewfinders, missing many shots in the process amidst their confusion. I realized a triple exposure would successfully capture the confusion around me and that is what I accomplished. It is great fun seeking source material for double and triple exposures! You must remember,though, where the main point of interest was situated on the first shot in order not to wipe it out with a point of interest on the second shot. Like mastering all photographic skills, practice, practice, practice.
• 08-05-2004, 10:36 AM
roy
One of the types of multiple exposure that interests me, is the effect created by UK photographer and teacher John Blakemore, who achieved a 'transparent' look where he was building up images rather in the form of layers. Looking at a still life for example, you would realise that there were other images underneath, not strikingly obvious at first glance. That, I would like to try but am not sure how to go about it. He also made some images in a 'windscape' series, where the foliage on trees took on the appearance of cotton wool and I assume that was by using the technique outlined by Les.
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 3 123 Last