Suggestions when tripods won’t work for multi-second exposure

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

C

Cclaude

New member
Member's gallery
Looking for suggestions for a fairly heavy camera rig ( Fugifilm gfx100 w/ the GF20-35mm lense) When doing longer exposure images when tripods won’t work. This week was shooting waterfalls with the edges heavily overgrown, and the pool adjacent is 12-20ft deep… run into cases like this needing to get away from cliffs also. I know the climbing photographer Simon Carter made a collapsible a- frame… any other suggestions
 
Member's gallery
A couple of suggestions. 1. a monopod with the three tiny legs on the bottom. Might get you enough stability for some shots. If you have good light you might try some bracketing. I've done some bracketing hand held with faster shutter speeds and high frame rates. It still gives you the motion of the water but maybe not as good as a longer exposure.

The photo below is a bracketed photo with 7 photos merged. Did this merge in LR. These were taken handheld. I don't have a lot of water around me but I have seen some bracketed shots of running water and they look a lot like a long exposure maybe in the 1 ot 2 second range.

DSC_1984-HDR-Enhanced-NR.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Cclaude said:
Looking for suggestions for a fairly heavy camera rig ( Fugifilm gfx100 w/ the GF20-35mm lense) When doing longer exposure images when tripods won’t work. This week was shooting waterfalls with the edges heavily overgrown, and the pool adjacent is 12-20ft deep… run into cases like this needing to get away from cliffs also. I know the climbing photographer Simon Carter made a collapsible a- frame… any other suggestions
Click to expand...
Are you trying to get the creamy-water look and is that why you need the longer exposure? How long?

Short answer, btw, is figure out how to get a tripod up there. I shoot the GFX and while it has IBIS, the extreme resolution pretty much requires a stable tripod to get the sharpest image. You know all that...
 
Member's gallery
Nimi said:
Are you trying to get the creamy-water look and is that why you need the longer exposure? How long?

Short answer, btw, is figure out how to get a tripod up there. I shoot the GFX and while it has IBIS, the extreme resolution pretty much requires a stable tripod to get the sharpest image. You know all that...
Click to expand...
Depends on the falls, sometimes 1/5sec is good and others would be 2-3 seconds
 
Member's gallery
Cclaude said:
Depends on the falls, sometimes 1/5sec is good and others would be 2-3 seconds
Click to expand...
The only advice I have is taking two shots, one long one short and combining them in post to get the blurry falls and sharp background.

Good luck, welcome to the forum and please post your results!
 
Member's gallery
Cclaude said:
The problem is is that I need to get my camera out horizontally also by about 6 ft… have looked into painters pole mounts, but then needto stabilize it
Click to expand...
I'd look into a long sturdy boom with a solid support back at your end like a very solid tripod and sand bags to counterweight the boom.

There are commercial solutions that are typically quite expensive for that length but this kind of special use stuff can also be home built using wood, piping or other materials if you're handy with tools and construction.
 
Member's gallery
I was going to suggest a drone…but have seen that @Nimi and Jeff had the same thought…. However, Nimi mentioned the extendable center poles of some tripods, Manfrotto specifically. I have one of these but would be reluctant to mount a camera due to tipping issues…. Even if you anchor the off side legs this is a risky setup, not just for your gear but personal safety at cliff’s edge. A remote trigger might come in handy….
IMG_1790.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

IMG_1791.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

IMG_1792.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Cclaude said:
Looking for suggestions for a fairly heavy camera rig ( Fugifilm gfx100 w/ the GF20-35mm lense) When doing longer exposure images when tripods won’t work. This week was shooting waterfalls with the edges heavily overgrown, and the pool adjacent is 12-20ft deep… run into cases like this needing to get away from cliffs also. I know the climbing photographer Simon Carter made a collapsible a- frame… any other suggestions
Click to expand...
Not sure if this would meet your needs but the Platypod Max is very portable and remarkably stable, as long as you have somewhere to set the unit, or strap it to a tree.

IMG_1803.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
IMG_1802.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Because of overgrowth on the shores, I need to get out over the river which forms deep pools at the creeks edge,. In together out about 6 ft horizontally… I just put an order for a connector to a painters pole from Windtech. But that is a huge lever, and to get it to hold still for a second may be asking a lot
 
The only other thing comes to mind is a 30 shot multiple exposure at the slowest shutter speed you can reliably hand hold and one shot at higher shutter speed, all the same shot. The auto align in photoshop will take care of some wobble and then convert the 30 to smart object and average or median. Blend that result with the high shutter speed one in areas where more sharpness is needed.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
The only other thing comes to mind is a 30 shot multiple exposure at the slowest shutter speed you can reliably hand hold and one shot at higher shutter speed, all the same shot. The auto align in photoshop will take care of some wobble and then convert the 30 to smart object and average or median. Blend that result with the high shutter speed one in areas where more sharpness is needed.
Click to expand...
The issue is I can’t physically get there unless I use a pac-raft ( and in a second location I shoot I can’t even use them) since the stream is fast running yet the pools are extremely deep ( like 10-20ft deep). The water is gorgeous since it’s absolutely crystal clear
 
Member's gallery
Well, it'll be a lot to lug around but here's an answer. Figure out where you can place a sturdy tripod. Measure how far out from there you'll need the camera to be and double it. Get a pole that long, make sure it'll support the weight when the pole is balanced at it's mid-point. Figure out a mounting mechanism to mount the pole to the tripod and get a wireless remote. You'll probably need to make a lot of exposures to get a sharp one as any pole light enough to pack in will likely have some flex and be very subject to even the slightest breeze.
I did something similar though mine was a vertical adaptation. It work well for many years as I was either shooting in daylight or with strobes. Last month I did a night shoot with weak constant lighting and there was a light breeze. I found out just how much the rig swayed as I tried 2 sec exposures. YMMV....
 
Member's gallery
There are fabric triangles sold with Velcro straps to attach to any tripod. One then fills the triangle with rocks at the site. These are more commonly used to hold filters and filter wallets. Or take a sturdy bag and fill it with rocks and sand and hang it off the hook on the tripod.


The longer the exposure the less evident any tripod movement will be in the picture. Experiment on a windy day with increasingly longer shutter speeds and exposures.
 
Calson said:
There are fabric triangles sold with Velcro straps to attach to any tripod. One then fills the triangle with rocks at the site. These are more commonly used to hold filters and filter wallets. Or take a sturdy bag and fill it with rocks and sand and hang it off the hook on the tripod.


The longer the exposure the less evident any tripod movement will be in the picture. Experiment on a windy day with increasingly longer shutter speeds and exposures.
Click to expand...

I would have thought the other way around, a short exposure would not show much tripod movement, but a long exposure you'd want the tripod rock solid. That's why I though a series of shorter exposures blended together to simulate a longer exposure.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
I would have thought the other way around, a short exposure would not show much tripod movement, but a long exposure you'd want the tripod rock solid. That's why I though a series of shorter exposures blended together to simulate a longer exposure.
Click to expand...
The theory is that during a long exposure any given shake will make up for such a small portion of the exposure that it won't be noticed. This is an old large format trick when there might be some tripod shake from the shutter first activating. This doesn't hold up when the source of the vibrations is continuous like you'd get with a breeze. I've had a "breeze" around waterfalls on perfectly calm days. The thermal difference between the top and bottom seems to get the air moving.
 
Warren D said:
The theory is that during a long exposure any given shake will make up for such a small portion of the exposure that it won't be noticed. This is an old large format trick when there might be some tripod shake from the shutter first activating. This doesn't hold up when the source of the vibrations is continuous like you'd get with a breeze. I've had a "breeze" around waterfalls on perfectly calm days. The thermal difference between the top and bottom seems to get the air moving.
Click to expand...

Makes sense, similar to making people disappear if they are moving. I guess I'd rather a solid mount if possible.
 
Member's gallery
I have bought and rejected quite a few tripods over the years when I received them and would extend the legs to their maximum length and then press down on the top of the tripod and look for any flexing of the legs. The load rating specs from tripod manufacturers or distributors is a meaningless number. What I like about B&H is that they make it very easy to do returns.

The book by photographer Jeanine Leech was a real eye-opener for me. All her exposures are very long ones and often several seconds in duration. She uses a "sturdy" tripod and that does not mean a heavy one as would be used for video camera work. I have two tripods for landscape photography and one weighs 4.9 lb and the other weighs 3.5 lb and my primary head is a Arca-Swiss D4 GP that weighs 2.1 lb (and supports to a 66 lb camera and lens load). The total weight is of no real importance in the field.

The only lens where there is significant image magnification is the 70-200mm lens so in most situations there is no image magnification that would show camera movement with a very long exposure.

Early in the day the winds are less and this is the time to photograph unless one wants plant motion blur in the images. Wind gusts can exert many pounds of lateral force which is why I do not bother with sand bags after doing the calculations.

This is in the area where trial and error use of the camera is going to provide far more useful information. Any tips or tricks are starting points.

There is also the option of looking for a large rock to block the wind or to get very low and not stand up and have double the tripod height required and both more wind leverage against the tripod and also greater wind strength.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top