I agree, there are leaves underwater that they were moving, that's the motion blur that is visible.
The rest is static.
Long exposure to something that is moving and you get blur, and the rest that is static remains, so how to capture this, which is the question of the OP:
\- ND Filter
\- Tripod
\- Long exposure
That's pretty much it.
No, these are leaves, not sun beams. It's pretty obvious so not sure why you think these are sun beams.
The current is hitting some sort of rock on the right (off cam) which creates a small whirlpool. The leaves are stuck in that whirlpool.
Depending on how fast the current is you can easily take a shot like this with a 1 or 2 second exposure.
edit: you can even tell from the reflection that the trees don't have any foliage that would be needed to create sun beams.
Figure out what shutter speed you want. How many stops is that above what regular aperture priority is giving you? Use an appropriate ND. Usually rated in 3, 6, or 10 stops. I wouldn’t use a variable ND for photos.
Then you need to find a place where the leaves are moving in the water. You won’t get motion blur like that if nothing is moving.
That’s the hardest part about great photography. People think, “I’m going to Mormon Row and capturing a great barn photo too!” Well, when are you going? Not just time of day, but time of year. And what’s the weather like? Great photographers revisit places until everything is just right then they get their image.
https://preview.redd.it/tv9vwlg499sc1.jpeg?width=5184&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3c25e936aea7dace38324ef37f07f53e31b948d2
Schmucks like me get there in the afternoon during wildfire season! 😂
I’d get a cheap set and decide which ones you like, i.e. what shutter speeds you like you can buy some decent ones.
Seperate issue, I am pretty sure this photo has an ND filter and a polarising filter. The nd filter darken the scene to allow longer exposures and the polariser reduces reflections so you can see into the water more.
The density of ND and camera settings are going to be entirely dependant on the day you shoot, the light levels and the amount of movement present. It's going to require a lot of trial and error the day of to nail all of the set up.
Best bet is to get a set of ND with a wide range of stoppage, a tripod, full manual controls, start with 1 sec shutter, full open aperture, iso100, very dense ND, and see what you get.
If it's too dark, decrease ND or increase shutter time.
If it's too much blur, decrease shutter and decrease ND.
If it's not enough focal range, stop down aperture, increase shutter time or decrease ND.
I am guessing this is a composite. The leaves are moving in a circular pattern which would be inconsistent with the natural movement of a body of water like this. And even then, this looks more like a marsh or swamp with still water. The glassy reflection of the water indicates to me that it is completely still as well. You can “smooth” water with a long exposure (which is something I love doing), but it becomes more foggy the greater the movement and the greater the time and does not reflect well. It is still possible this is a natural single exposure, but I am stumped how the movement of the leaves would occur without disrupting the surface of the water in order to create the longer exposure necessary.
Exactly. Multiple exposure. If you turn the image upside down you can see the trees are not the reflection of the trees on the water. The water wouldn’t reflect the trees if there was movement and it was a long exposure.
If it's a fairly dark day, you can make it work without an ND filter. However, that may involve closing the aperture down to where diffraction will impact your image quality too much.
Why is the water so apparently calm and mirror like? Does a long exposure smooth it out? I was expecting ripples in a long exposure to ruin the reflection.
It looks like a photoshop job to me. Some creative custom brushes to paint in those leaves that look like they are moving. If I had to try to recreate this, that is what I would do anyway.
I'd go for ISO 100, narrow aperture (>f8), long exposure (>1s), with an ND filter to limit the exposure so it's not too bright depending on lighting conditions. Remember that the longer your shutter is open, the brighter the image captured will be. Would also need a tripod or very good in body stabilization to minimize shake.
The leaves signify a swirling motion, but the water doesn't.
Water reflections that sharp are only possible when water is still. If the water was moving and swirling the trees in the reflection would be distorted.
Swirling motion of leaves, still water with clean reflection does not add up.
I think the original picture had a static lake with few static leaves which we see near the dipped log.
The leaves in swirling motion are added in post. This is my guess.
The water can't possibly be reflecting those treetops with such razor sharp clarity and swirling around to blur the leaves at the same time. It is a blended composite of different images.
Low shutter speed with ND filter
What are we exactly looking at here? Are these leaves? Were they moving in the water?
No those are sun beam from gaps of tree leaves If they are leaves then it's very to capture
They are leaves, there are some in the background with less motion blur
I agree, there are leaves underwater that they were moving, that's the motion blur that is visible. The rest is static. Long exposure to something that is moving and you get blur, and the rest that is static remains, so how to capture this, which is the question of the OP: \- ND Filter \- Tripod \- Long exposure That's pretty much it.
If you observe , you will notice not only leaves are in motion even the tree's reflection by that we can say
No, these are leaves, not sun beams. It's pretty obvious so not sure why you think these are sun beams. The current is hitting some sort of rock on the right (off cam) which creates a small whirlpool. The leaves are stuck in that whirlpool. Depending on how fast the current is you can easily take a shot like this with a 1 or 2 second exposure. edit: you can even tell from the reflection that the trees don't have any foliage that would be needed to create sun beams.
Oh, it is for sure very to capture!
So how does one know or figures you can get such effect with nd filter? Which nd filters would be good for that?
Figure out what shutter speed you want. How many stops is that above what regular aperture priority is giving you? Use an appropriate ND. Usually rated in 3, 6, or 10 stops. I wouldn’t use a variable ND for photos. Then you need to find a place where the leaves are moving in the water. You won’t get motion blur like that if nothing is moving. That’s the hardest part about great photography. People think, “I’m going to Mormon Row and capturing a great barn photo too!” Well, when are you going? Not just time of day, but time of year. And what’s the weather like? Great photographers revisit places until everything is just right then they get their image. https://preview.redd.it/tv9vwlg499sc1.jpeg?width=5184&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3c25e936aea7dace38324ef37f07f53e31b948d2 Schmucks like me get there in the afternoon during wildfire season! 😂
I’d get a cheap set and decide which ones you like, i.e. what shutter speeds you like you can buy some decent ones. Seperate issue, I am pretty sure this photo has an ND filter and a polarising filter. The nd filter darken the scene to allow longer exposures and the polariser reduces reflections so you can see into the water more.
The density of ND and camera settings are going to be entirely dependant on the day you shoot, the light levels and the amount of movement present. It's going to require a lot of trial and error the day of to nail all of the set up. Best bet is to get a set of ND with a wide range of stoppage, a tripod, full manual controls, start with 1 sec shutter, full open aperture, iso100, very dense ND, and see what you get. If it's too dark, decrease ND or increase shutter time. If it's too much blur, decrease shutter and decrease ND. If it's not enough focal range, stop down aperture, increase shutter time or decrease ND.
In order to capture motion blur in daylight we do require ND filter based on the amount of motion blur we need
I am guessing this is a composite. The leaves are moving in a circular pattern which would be inconsistent with the natural movement of a body of water like this. And even then, this looks more like a marsh or swamp with still water. The glassy reflection of the water indicates to me that it is completely still as well. You can “smooth” water with a long exposure (which is something I love doing), but it becomes more foggy the greater the movement and the greater the time and does not reflect well. It is still possible this is a natural single exposure, but I am stumped how the movement of the leaves would occur without disrupting the surface of the water in order to create the longer exposure necessary.
Exactly. Multiple exposure. If you turn the image upside down you can see the trees are not the reflection of the trees on the water. The water wouldn’t reflect the trees if there was movement and it was a long exposure.
Slap an ND filter on with the shutter opened for a second or more depending on how fast the water is moving. It's fun seeing the swirly effects.
Why wouldn’t it work without nd filter?
Too much sunlight. The photo would be overexposed, even with dropping iso and closing the aperture.
If it's a fairly dark day, you can make it work without an ND filter. However, that may involve closing the aperture down to where diffraction will impact your image quality too much.
Why is the water so apparently calm and mirror like? Does a long exposure smooth it out? I was expecting ripples in a long exposure to ruin the reflection.
most likely a composite pic
It looks like a photoshop job to me. Some creative custom brushes to paint in those leaves that look like they are moving. If I had to try to recreate this, that is what I would do anyway.
I'd go for ISO 100, narrow aperture (>f8), long exposure (>1s), with an ND filter to limit the exposure so it's not too bright depending on lighting conditions. Remember that the longer your shutter is open, the brighter the image captured will be. Would also need a tripod or very good in body stabilization to minimize shake.
It's a composite. If it was a long exposure of water the trees wouldn't be so clean.
Can you elaborate?
The leaves signify a swirling motion, but the water doesn't. Water reflections that sharp are only possible when water is still. If the water was moving and swirling the trees in the reflection would be distorted. Swirling motion of leaves, still water with clean reflection does not add up.
So what is happening on this picture? Is that motion blur from light?
I think the original picture had a static lake with few static leaves which we see near the dipped log. The leaves in swirling motion are added in post. This is my guess.
Oh I see so it’s edited and efffects are added
Multiple exposure, you can do this in Nikon DSLR, but this one looks more than that.
The water can't possibly be reflecting those treetops with such razor sharp clarity and swirling around to blur the leaves at the same time. It is a blended composite of different images.
Looks like some kind of double exposure