BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: How to do Landscape Photography and Nature Photos

Mary J. Coker

Water in Motion - Veiling Effect

When shooting a stream or flowing water, how do you get that veiling effect?

To love this question, log in above
July 07, 2005

Kerry L. Walker

You need to use a longer shutter speed.

To love this comment, log in above
July 07, 2005

Kerry L. Walker

I would start shooting at 1/30 and go shower from there, down to maybe 1/4. The slower you go, the greater the effect.

To love this comment, log in above
July 07, 2005

Nobu Nagase

Just recently, someone here sent me email asking how to shoot falls and streams. I learned a lot from my friend Darren and a couple of others who shoot most beautiful water falls and streams ... Anyhow, my answer to her was this:
I used a special kind of film called Fuji Velvia. ISO ratings of this film are 50 and 100. I used ISO 50; the film was a gift from a good friend of mine who also posts at BP. Fuji colors are superb in obtaining rich green forest colors, blue sky and water, etc. ... We normally like to have less lighting (overcast days, or very early morning hours, or 30 minutes before or after sunset hours) when shooting streams and waterfalls ... so that slow shutter speeds can be used. The reason for this is to capture the water in a continuous flow, instead of freezing (stop-action) them. The type of images that you saw on my gallery and Darren's gallery are taken using the technique I just explained.

To love this comment, log in above
July 07, 2005

Nobu Nagase

... btw, a tripod is a must, and a polarizer is desired.

To love this comment, log in above
July 07, 2005

Bob Cammarata

All of the advice given was good. A long shutter speed, tripod, slow film, diffused light or shade. When metering, do it manually. Meter the frothiest rapids (is that really a word?), and over-expose them by no more than 1/2 stop. I've found that rapids cannot withstand anything over +1/2 stop without blowing out. Also, try not to include any sky in your composition for the same reason.

To love this comment, log in above
July 07, 2005

Nobu Nagase

Use a cable release or remote release by all means if your camera is equipped with one.

To love this comment, log in above
July 08, 2005

Maria Melnyk

By the way, I don't think anyone mentioned that Velvia is a slide film, and it's great, but if you want print film use Kodak Ultra 100. Using a polarizer does cut down the light and give darker skies and more saturated colors, but it also eliminates reflections, and unless you want to see through the water it's not always desirable to use that polarizer. You might just kill the effect you're trying to photograph, like the reflection of trees in the water. If you need to cut down the light to use that long shutter speed, please use a neutral density filter.

To love this comment, log in above
July 12, 2005

Tamara . Lynn

hey Nobi, I don't remeber where, but I was reading that they have a Velvia action for ps, have you seen examples of it

To love this comment, log in above
July 12, 2005

Dan Fogelberg

I agree that a polarizer isn't always desireable, and that a neutral density filter will force slower shutter speeds without changing the reflectivity or color. If you have manual or aperture-priority metering, simply stopping down until you force a slow enough shutter speed works best. If that's still not slow enough (I prefer 1/8 or slower for that silky effect), then it's time for the filter. I was just doing this on a mountain hike yesterday, and found that even with the .6 ND filter and an ISO setting of 100 I was waiting for a stray cloud to darken the scene enough to allow 1/4 second exposures. Remember that other objects like flowers or foliage will also blur during a long exposure, so be aware of the wind. One more thing: the closer you are to the subject, the greater its apparent movement relative to film or sensor. Thus, moving water that is very close to the camera will blur at faster shutter speeds than something moving at a distance.

To love this comment, log in above
July 13, 2005

Dan Fogelberg


	Ice Flow f 7.4 at 1/90th, 280mm (35mm equivalent), Boulder, Colorado, 12:30pm, February 16, 2005. Note blurring of closer waterfall despite faster shutter speed, which stopped the gentler motion of the more distant bubbles. Nikon Coolpix 5700, Velbon tripod. Modified from original color image in Photoshop. Dan Fogelberg
	Flowers at Mitchell Creek f 7.4 at 1/6.7 sec., 280mm (35mm equivalent), Indian Peaks Wilderness, Colorado, 1:45pm, July 12, 2005. Luckily, there was almost no breeze to move the flowers. Nikon Coolpix 5700, tripod, .6 neutral density filter. Dan Fogelberg

I agree that a polarizer isn't always desireable, and that a neutral density filter will force slower shutter speeds without changing the reflectivity or color. If you have manual or aperture-priority metering, simply stopping down until you force a slow enough shutter speed works best. If that's still not slow enough (I prefer 1/8 or slower for that silky effect), then it's time for the filter. I was just doing this on a mountain hike yesterday, and found that even with the .6 ND filter and an ISO setting of 100 I was waiting for a stray cloud to darken the scene enough to allow 1/4 second exposures. Remember that other objects like flowers or foliage will also blur during a long exposure, so be aware of the wind. One more thing: the closer you are to the subject, the greater its apparent movement relative to film or sensor. Thus, moving water that is very close to the camera will blur at faster shutter speeds than something moving at a distance.

To love this comment, log in above
July 13, 2005

This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here

Report this Thread