What happened?

Photography knowledge exchange.

Moderator: Scott Waters

Post Reply
User avatar
brick911
Posts: 3488
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:52 am
Location: Morrisville, PA

What happened?

Post by brick911 » July 19th, 2010, 6:50 am

I saw something like this before in here (maybe before the crash). What happened with my exposure here? The pic itself is trash... either the snake or I (no tripod) moved, but check out the really cool light waves flickering off the end of its tongue. Can somebody break this exposure down for me? I'm just looking to add to my ever evolving knowledge of photography. Thanks,

Bob


Image

User avatar
DCooper
Posts: 203
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 10:20 am
Location: Marshall County, WV

Re: What happened?

Post by DCooper » July 19th, 2010, 8:13 am

HOLY @#*& A SPITING COBRA!!! haha no idea Bob.. just thought it looked cool

User avatar
justinm
Posts: 3430
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 4:26 am
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: What happened?

Post by justinm » July 19th, 2010, 8:42 am

I would say shutter speed and/or flash were too slow to capture the movement. ISO could be a factor as well.

User avatar
MHollanders
Posts: 583
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 1:32 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: What happened?

Post by MHollanders » July 19th, 2010, 9:07 am

I think it may be the slow shutter speed that captured the reflection of the flash on different angles of the tongue as it flicked?

Justin: how would ISO be a factor in this?

Later, Matt

User avatar
justinm
Posts: 3430
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 4:26 am
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: What happened?

Post by justinm » July 19th, 2010, 9:44 am

I always used higher ISO in lower light, or fast action in the film days. I'm going to assume this translates the same way into digital. In the studio I would shoot 100 ISO film. For fireworks I would shoot 400 or 800, and at a car race 1600 or even 3200 ISO film. So the ISO is an important factor IMO.

User avatar
MHollanders
Posts: 583
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 1:32 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: What happened?

Post by MHollanders » July 19th, 2010, 10:48 am

Justin,

I am wondering why you think the ISO is responsible for the weird light on the snake's tongue, unless I misread that.

Later, Matt

User avatar
Schell
Posts: 456
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 8:33 am
Location: SF Bay Area
Contact:

Re: What happened?

Post by Schell » July 19th, 2010, 11:51 am

Higher ISO=more sensativity to light in both film and digital realms. So if a higher ISO was used when the photo was shot, you could have increased the shutter speed and been able to freeze the motion.

It doesn't look to me like a flash was used here. If it were, it would have frozen the motion of the snake and tongue. It looks like a slow shutter speed was used and the sun or light source reflecting off the tongue in a wave like pattern, it's the movement of the tongue and snake while the shutter was open that is resulting in the fuzzy head and the multiple waves of light. A tripod wouldn't have necessarily helped in this situation since this subject itself is moving. A flash and a higher shutter speed or using a smaller f/# (larger aperture) and a higher shutter speed would have been effective. Bottom line is that your shutter speed was too slow for that exposure.

User avatar
MHollanders
Posts: 583
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 1:32 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: What happened?

Post by MHollanders » July 19th, 2010, 12:07 pm

Schell is right that it looks like there was no flash, but I still hold to the idea that it was a light source reflecting back on the tongue as it flicked.

FYI, I think I misunderstood Justin when he said that the ISO was a factor in creating the wavy pattern on the tongue.

Later, Matt

User avatar
justinm
Posts: 3430
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 4:26 am
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Re: What happened?

Post by justinm » July 19th, 2010, 1:30 pm

Matt,

Sorry I didn't know you were focusing your attention on the reflection of the light, my bad.

Erik Williams
Posts: 100
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:57 pm

Re: What happened?

Post by Erik Williams » July 20th, 2010, 8:47 am

The highlights in the tongue blew faster than the rest of the exposure because it was the brightest light source (most reflective) in the frame. Kind of like shooting a lightbulb indoors; the room may be properly exposed, but the lightbulb will be way overexposed. The less reflective parts of the tongue are a blur because they didn't have the same reflective value. If the tongue was still, the highlights would be even more blown.

Erik.

Post Reply