Introduction - A way of seeing - 4

Project: Photographing movement

Exercise: Shutter speeds

This was a very useful exercise for me. After doing it, I feel more confident in "playing" with the shutter speed. It became easier to make a decision regarding the choice of shutter speed according to the movement of the subject (the speed of movement, the direction).

As the exercise instructed, I took a set of photos of a moving subject (in this case water flowing over an artificial construction), using different shutter speeds, from 1/2000 to 1 second. I had a bit of a problem with the exposure, because the setting was a little dark , so the aperture remained 2.0 from 1/2000 to 1/200. Only when I reached a shutter speed of 1/100 the aperture started to go smaller. The result was that the first photos (with the highest shutter speeds used), are kind of dark. But the subject (water) is clear and visible.

Here are the photos:

1/2000, f2

At such a fast shutter speed, the movement is frozen in time, every droplet's shape is visible.

1/1000, f2

I cannot see the difference between 1/2000 and 1/1000. For my little trained eye at least, the movement seems to be frozen in the same way. I see very clearly, every shape created by the flowing water, as in the 1/2000 version.

1/800, f2

I think the 1/800 version starts to show some differences. The shapes created by the water look more elongated, they started to loose the roundness and the clarity.

1/500, f2

A bit surprising for me is that between the 1/800 and 1/500 versions, there's no difference. At least not one that I could see. Being able to see a difference between 1/1000 and 1/800, I was sure the same would happen with 1/800 and 1/500. It didn't ... (?!)

1/320,f2

Again, between 1/500 and 1/320 I can see a clear difference. The droplets in 1/320 lost their shape completely, now they look more like some short, thick lines.

1/250, f2

Though even longer and fuzzier, the water shapes in the 1/250 version, still look rather sharp, compared to the 1/100 version, bellow. I thin the 1/250 version is the last which shows a clear picture of the water. The water shapes slowly become more and more blurred, with every decrease in shutter speed.

1/100, f2.5

1/60, f4

1/30, f5

1/10, f9

1/2, f22

When the shutter speed reaches half a second, the water already looks more like steam or mist, and the photo is brighter, as the aperture can't go smaller than 22, for my camera.

I still have problems with exposure, every time I take pictures; I think it's related to the way (or more exactly the area on which) I focus, depending on how bright it is in the first place, and with the metering mode. I really need to get some feedback on this.

1 sec, f22

I cannot see a clear difference between half a second and one second shutter speed, although I expected it to be quite obvious.
I took a photo with a 5 sec shutter speed as well, but it turned out so bright, that I couldn't use it.

As I was saying in the beginning of this post, I learned and reviewed very useful information regarding shutter speeds. I realized I still have problems with exposure, so my next goal is to learn how to compensate the exposure and how to use the metering mode in a better way.

But aside from the technical results, there is the issue of "what I like best". And in this respect I have two things to say. One is that I like the water to look "frozen" in time when I have people in the picture, in the water especially. I think it gives the feeling that the scene is alive, better than if the water looks blurred.
And I like the blurred, fuzzy, steamy looking water, given by a slow shutter speed when I photograph just water flowing (either in this artificial setting or in a natural one, like a waterfall). So in this case I think I like the 1/2 sec or 1 sec version, where the water looks the way I just described.