Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Okay, I guess this has probably been discussed before, but what is the general concensus on landscape pictures with water - I think that it requires more technique to capture flowing water (milky) rather than still water images - ensuring that highlight detail is not clipped etc..etc...
Quote: Some blur is ok but 30 second exposures look ridiculous in my opinion.
I TOTALLY agree Malcolm. SO many just end up looking like a river of milk.
Quote: Will this lactose intolerance never end?
LOL!!!!!!!
I hate sliky and milky, much prefer splashes and blobs. I don't mind a hint of motion, and quite like the idea of blended exposures with a bit of both. But never milky!
But you'll get as much consensus on this as if you asked about frames and borders. The original question says "silky and milky" might take more technique..Maybe so, maybe not, but either way it's hardly the point is it - it's whether you like the result
Chacun a son gout, etc
Stephen
Though not being a fan of the five hour exposure or even the very long just under a minute jobs - mainly because they are lazy photography - in the end it's down to each individual person.
I will say this. Milky, silky water is not as popular with the buying public as some would have you believe...unless it's as part of a complete abstract.
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.



















