30 second Portrait

S

Siilver

Guest
8071380481_c288f931c4_o.jpg


Trying something a wee bit different, i had an idea from tech, going from the days of having to sit around for mins for a portrait, so from the days of long exposures and having to sit very still for the length of exposures, so for this i have Helen sitting still for 30s, it hard sitting still for very long, so there is a bit of movement on her face but im happy with that, the i do like the movement in the grass, i will be trying more of this it gives a nice effect.
 
I like the "contemplative" quality to this, but for me a portrait needs to be in focus, and the face isn't, sorry.
 
sbowler579 said:
I like the "contemplative" quality to this, but for me a portrait needs to be in focus, and the face isn't, sorry.
Click to expand...

you tried sitting still for 30 seconds?your body is easy enough to do, but you face is very hard to do, breathing blinking all has an effect and thats what i was looking for

a portrait is to capture a person character, not to just capture the look on a person face, education is coming in useful for once lol

thanks for you view and input
 
I like the idea behind it and think it would be a good portrait, but I'm affraid its the blur in the face that's making me think twice about it.

Definately keep it up thought and you might get lucky and have one nice and sharp :D
 
J4MIE_P said:
I like the idea behind it and think it would be a good portrait, but I'm affraid its the blur in the face that's making me think twice about it.

Definately keep it up thought and you might get lucky and have one nice and sharp :D
Click to expand...

no wonder they used head braces back in the day lol
 
Maybe stacking exposures could be an option?

Camera on a tripod and take one of the girl with a reasonable shutter speed, then take one with the 30 seconds and merge the two together?

That way you'll get the effect in the background but have the sharpness in the model?
 
J4MIE_P said:
Maybe stacking exposures could be an option?

Camera on a tripod and take one of the girl with a reasonable shutter speed, then take one with the 30 seconds and merge the two together?

That way you'll get the effect in the background but have the sharpness in the model?
Click to expand...

That is how I would do also
 
J4MIE_P said:
Maybe stacking exposures could be an option?

Camera on a tripod and take one of the girl with a reasonable shutter speed, then take one with the 30 seconds and merge the two together?

That way you'll get the effect in the background but have the sharpness in the model?
Click to expand...

then it wouldnt be a 30 second exposure then?
it would be 30 seconds plus a 1/500 second exposure or what ever it would need to be, but that not what i was aim for, i was looking her to keep still as much as possible
 
Karen said:
I understand your idea behind it but have to agree for me personally it doesnt work because of the softness in her face. If there was more definition to her features perhaps
Click to expand...

i can see lips, eye, eyebrows, shadows and highlights
its not like you cant tell its a face

maybe to creative or something lol
 
This is what photography is all about its subjective one persons junk another's treasure sort of thing
 
Pmc2011 said:
This is what photography is all about its subjective one persons junk another's treasure sort of thing
Click to expand...

thats the way i see it, but its when good people are slightly open to difference
rather than everything has to be a certain way and boxed
 
Doesn't work for me either sorry, I'm sure you could have got a similar effect on the grass without having a 30 seconds exposure? Even a few seconds would have caught some movement while still keep the facial features in focus. To me it just looks like you've tried to take her photo and she's moved her head while you hit the shutter button.

Sorry if it's not what you wanted to hear.
 
swordjo said:
Doesn't work for me either sorry, I'm sure you could have got a similar effect on the grass without having a 30 seconds exposure? Even a few seconds would have caught some movement while still keep the facial features in focus. To me it just looks like you've tried to take her photo and she's moved her head while you hit the shutter button.

Sorry if it's not what you wanted to hear.
Click to expand...

thats cool

i need an arty forum lol
 
What doesn't work for me is that this shot doesn't look like it needs to be a 30s exposure to get the same effect. If you were to take a photo of a girl sat in the grass on a windy day then you could get plenty of grass movement in 1 or 2 seconds and have a much better chance of having the face sharp.
 
i dont think people are getting this, i wanted to do 30 seconds exposure, i was to shot like they did years ago, when exposure for old slide film was for mins not 1/500 sec
that was my aim

thanks for your pov
 
Why not try this using the same concept as a multiplicity photo, set the cam up on a tripod, take a long exposue of the grass moving, then take a second one of your model then add the two together :)
Obviously this doesnt follow the concept of the old days long exposures but it would allow you to get the grass how you like it and your subject sharp at the same time!
 
Siilver said:
i dont think people are getting this, i wanted to do 30 seconds exposure, i was to shot like they did years ago, when exposure for old slide film was for mins not 1/500 sec
that was my aim

thanks for your pov
Click to expand...


I will be quiet lol
 
The idea may be fine but the execution hasn't worked - not sure who's not getting it :shrug:
 
gramps said:
The idea may be fine but the execution hasn't worked - not sure who's not getting it :shrug:
Click to expand...

your the first to say that, they others havent said that at all
or did i miss that and not get it ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lmgculley said:
Why not try this using the same concept as a multiplicity photo, set the cam up on a tripod, take a long exposue of the grass moving, then take a second one of your model then add the two together :)
Obviously this doesnt follow the concept of the old days long exposures but it would allow you to get the grass how you like it and your subject sharp at the same time!
Click to expand...

this was said above and i replied to the question

Siilver said:
then it wouldnt be a 30 second exposure then?
it would be 30 seconds plus a 1/500 second exposure or what ever it would need to be, but that not what i was aim for, i was looking her to keep still as much as possible
Click to expand...
 
-Rob- said:
You may need to read between the lines but I think that's what most people are saying.
Click to expand...


i can only go by the keys that people press and post here

as i said i think i need an arty forum for this work
thanks for your comments
 
I don't understand the point of it either...?

I could understand some movement and light painting etc but....

She's sitting...like a rock...for 30s....

Was there a goal or just thought you'd try it and see if it works??? IMO...it doesn't...sorry!
 
I think you have some interesting ideas and it's great to experiment and be creative rather than do the same thing that's been done a million times before. I love to see people breaking the rules and doing different.

For me, this particular image does not quite work on a number of levels. You say you had the idea from long exposure times from the early days of photography. The photographers from that time did everything they could to keep the subject still and make the image as sharp as they could. The idea of deliberately allowing movement in a portait by using long exposures is relatively modern and has been used to brilliant effect by a number of photographers.

Have you looked at the work of Nicola Dove
http://www.lensculture.com/dove

and others...
http://andreafoto.wordpress.com/2010/11/23/the-beginning-of-long-exposure-portraits/

I feel your pic is too close to just being a snap that went wrong (I know it isn't and a lot of thought went into your image).

I would say keep working on this project and I look forward to seeing more.
 
Last edited:
PatrickO said:
I think you have some interesting ideas and it's great to experiment and be creative rather than do the same thing that's been done a million times before. I love to see people breaking the rules and doing different.

For me, this particular image does not quite work on a number of levels. You say you had the idea from long exposure times from the early days of photography. The photographers from that time did everything they could to keep the subject still and make the image as sharp as they could. The idea of deliberately allowing movement in a portait by using long exposures is relatively modern and has been used to brilliant effect by a number of photographers.

Have you looked at the work of Nicola Dove
http://www.lensculture.com/dove

and others...
http://andreafoto.wordpress.com/2010/11/23/the-beginning-of-long-exposure-portraits/

I feel your pic is too close to just being a snap that went wrong (I know it isn't and a lot of thought went into your image).

I would say keep working on this project and I look forward to seeing more.
Click to expand...

Finally someone who can see out side of the box and is open to work, we need more people like this, there was a positive and a negative, and these are good comments

On phone now will look at links when home
Thanks
 
Phil Young said:
I don't understand the point of it either...?

I could understand some movement and light painting etc but....

She's sitting...like a rock...for 30s....

Was there a goal or just thought you'd try it and see if it works??? IMO...it doesn't...sorry!
Click to expand...


It was a idea, but i'm guessing your not aloud ideas that are different from the normal
 
You're allowed ideas that are different than the norm, however people are allowed their opinions, and I think the prevailing opinion is that your idea hasn't worked, sorry!
 
J4MIE_P said:
Maybe stacking exposures could be an option?

Camera on a tripod and take one of the girl with a reasonable shutter speed, then take one with the 30 seconds and merge the two together?

That way you'll get the effect in the background but have the sharpness in the model?
Click to expand...

Great minds and all that :)
 
Siilver said:
It was a idea, but i'm guessing your not aloud ideas that are different from the normal
Click to expand...

You came and asked for opinions, and you got them. take a look a Jaroslavs work (Mothman) and see what people from this forum think of his 'different from normal' work! its totally outside the box and is stunning!
I have myself been in the position here where I have posted some work that I thought was great and recieved feedback that was less than I would have hoped for, its life, take it and move on. This may be a piece of work that you love, great, be pleased with it, but dont come on a public forum, ask for opinions and get mardy when you dont like the response you get!
 
lmgculley said:
You came and asked for opinions, and you got them. take a look a Jaroslavs work (Mothman) and see what people from this forum think of his 'different from normal' work! its totally outside the box and is stunning!
I have myself been in the position here where I have posted some work that I thought was great and recieved feedback that was less than I would have hoped for, its life, take it and move on. This may be a piece of work that you love, great, be pleased with it, but dont come on a public forum, ask for opinions and get mardy when you dont like the response you get!
Click to expand...


Where did I ask for an opinion hmm
I did say thank you for people opinions if you read all of the page
 
nickjohnwatson said:
Kudos for trying something different but I'm sorry I have to agree it doesnt do anything for me either.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your pov very nice for you
 
Siilver said:
Where did I ask for an opinion hmm
Click to expand...

You have posted this in Feedback and Critique and therefore are asking for for opinions by proxy. If this is not what you required there is a section named "Photos for Pleasure".
Siilver said:
Thanks for your pov very nice for you
Click to expand...
Getting defensive doesn't go down too well in this section, especially when people have taken the time to give an honest option.
 
Siilver said:
i can see lips, eye, eyebrows, shadows and highlights
its not like you cant tell its a face

maybe to creative or something lol
Click to expand...

Someone shouldn't be posting in the CRITIQUE section. If people don't like something, then that's their choice, you are not going to be able to argue someone into thinking you're a genius.

For me, the portrait should have more reference to the period these types of 'long exposure' portraits. I.e. costume, location, posture/pose.

I look forward to you telling me why I'm wrong. :)
 
Is there an arty section, for people who can have an open opinion to work that is different
 
kris3291 said:
Someone shouldn't be posting in the CRITIQUE section. If people don't like something, then that's their choice, you are not going to be able to argue someone into thinking you're a genius.

For me, the portrait should have more reference to the period these types of 'long exposure' portraits. I.e. costume, location, posture/pose.

I look forward to you telling me why I'm wrong. :)
Click to expand...

Why would I tell you your wrong for
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top