In 1975 when Kodak made the first digital
camera, a large printer sized box with a cassette on it, no one could have anticipated what a catastrophic effect it would have on the film based camera market. Now the majority of people have access to a device that allows for digital photography, whether it is a professional DSLR camera or a phone with integrated camera capabilities.
As digital cameras have developed, so to
have the techniques and skills photographers use to produce high quality and engaging photography on a regular basis. One such skill is the art of Long Exposure photography.
Slow shutter speed is another common term associated with Long Exposure photography. It refers to the length of time the cameras shutter is open, the longer it’s open, the greater the amount of light the film or image sensor is exposed to.
This shutter speed is coupled with the
aperture, also called f-numbers or stops. Like a persons pupil, it can dilate larger or smaller exposing the image sensor or film to more or less light respectively.
Adjusting the aperture controls the depth
of field. This relates to the distance in which objects appear clear and in focus. For example a photograph of a group of people could have someone in the foreground clearly visible and others in the background out of focus. Adjusting the aperture and increasing the depth of field can bring the people in the background into focus as well.
Once these settings and adjustments have
been learnt and understood, much more engaging and interesting photography can be produced, letting the viewer see things that would otherwise be invisible.
f
f-stop // aperture // focal
f
number // depth of field
Long Exposure’s primary use is to capture light and motion over a period of time. It can create dream like landscapes and intriguing environments, adding depth and character to what would otherwise be an ordinary photograph.
hy Research grap oto Ph
v.1
There are several key components and
techniques, alongside shutter speed and aperture size, that should be used to produce high quality and vibrant Long Exposure photography.
A tripod is necessary when using long
exposures as it drastically reduces the amount of shake and motion blur on what should be static objects in the photo.
Remotes can also be used to reduce motion blur, as when the shutter button is pressed and released, even the slightest shake or wobble can easily ruin the photograph.
If shooting during the day, or in brightly lit
environments, Neutral Density filters can be used. Varying with the density of the filter, these reduce the amount of light coming into the lens and allow for longer exposure times.
Digital cameras offer several different file
RAW
types to shoot in, varying in size and therefore quality. When shooting Long Exposure photography, it is normally best to choose the RAW image format as it gives the best quality image when it comes to printing. Applying noise correction is also needed, as the longer the exposure is, the more noise the image will be affected by.
that Long Exposure is most commonly used for; night time photography, moving water, light painting and solargraphy.
Long Exposure is most commonly used for
night time shooting, giving the final images an almost day time look and feel to them. As the setting and environment is very dark the exposure time can be increased greatly, letting what light sources there are in the shot, appear more vibrant and alive than in a well lit or day time setting. One of the most common night time techniques involving long exposure is to find an elevated position looking along the length of a main road. The long exposure allows the camera to capture the movement of the cars lights but not the vehicles themselves, creating fascinating light rails extending along the whole road.
IGH
There are four main areas of photography
ATE
Another common use of Long Exposure
is photographing moving water such as waterfalls or rapids. Even with a longer exposure time the rocks, foliage etc. surrounding the water keep their consistency and appearance. The water however takes on mist like qualities, switching from raging, crashing water to a cloudy fog like substance. This results in some really intriguing, mysterious photography that normally could not be imagined.
AINTIN
IGH
Although it has come into its own in the
last decade, thanks to readily available and affordable digital cameras, light painting can be traced as far back as 1914, when Frank Gilbreth used lights and the open shutter of a camera to track the motion of manufacturing and clerical workers. However he didn’t do this for any artistic purpose, it was an investigation to develop and improve workers efficiency and output. Recently however light painting has become a more artistic platform, with photographers creating some truly awe inspiring and seemingly impossible results. Using various kinds of light sources such as torches, LED’s, sparklers and even fireworks, light painters can use long exposure to paint and graffiti objects and environments without any legal ramifications. The camera traces the light sources movement and records it all in one single image.
RAPH
OLA
A solargraph is a long exposure , showing
the sun’s path across the sky over a long period of time. An example of solargraphy is Justin Quinnell’s six month long exposure showing the sun trails over the Clifton Suspension Bridge between December 2007 and June 2008. It was taken using a pin-hole camera made out of a drinks can with a single piece of photographic paper inside. The idea behind the photograph is fascinating enough due to the fact that Quinnell could have no idea what the final outcome would look like. It could have been over or under exposed, the can could have moved or it could have simply not worked at all. Fortunately it did though and although the quality is not great it makes up for it with a miraculous image, the long streaks of light showing bright sunny days, broken up occasionally when there must have been cloud cover.
Quinnell’s photo is commonly perceived
as the longest exposure in history, however much longer exposures have been created.
Michael Wesely, a German photographer
living in Berlin, has created some astounding colour and monochrome exposures of up to 3 years using large format (4x5 inch) cameras. In 2001 the Museum of Modern Art in New York invited him to use his specialised technique to record the redevelopment of their building. Setting up 8 cameras around the site he tracked the demolishing and rebuilding of the MoMA until its completion in 2004, meaning the shutter was left open for up to 34 months.
The results are spectacular with layer upon
layer of ever changing imagery, as soon as one detail is imprinted onto the film another detail is immediately realised on top of it. It could almost be seen to represent the actual building itself, the photo being destroyed, exposed to the elements and gradually built up layer upon layer over time.
jak wa an interview with
Jakob Wagner is a highly talented german photographer and a master of Long Exposure photography. With an inspiring portfolio from all around the globe he knows the ins and outs of his camera and uses it to produce spectacular photography time and time again.
kob agner
What inspired you to become a photographer? And then further into experimenting in long exposure photography. My interest in creative expression started early. At 12 I started to draw and a year later I discovered graffiti, I started with nightly, illegal lettering in urban areas and improved my graffiti to large scale commissions. I bought a camera for my work and my friend to be documented as a graffiti artist. I quickly realized what great potential the photography had and I started to use it as an independent artistic medium to use. At 16 I was then beginning to realize that I wanted to be a photographer. During a long period of experimenting I found that with long exposures at night, things you cannot see with the naked eye, could be visualized. That fascinated me and I started my “Night Landscapes” series. What other styles / types of photography have interested you the most during your photography education and career? I have always been interested and fascinated by documentary photography and the photographic work of abstract artists interests me very much. I also like landscape photography.
As the Majority of shoots must be very time consuming. Do you plan a trip looking at when and where exactly you should be. Or are they more spontaneous? It is a mixture of both. My work as a photo assistant brought me to many interesting places in the world so I’m always on the search for possible places for my night shots, which are then the more spontaneous pictures. Some other places I’ve photographed at night were researched and selected in advance, Google Earth and Street View are a great help. What is your thought process and actual implementation? Do you try and imagine the end product? Would you consider it a waste of time if the outcome is not correct first time given the amount of time involved? If I saw a place even in daylight, I can imagine how the night scene will look. But if I’m out at night and come to a new location is so excited to see the first exposure, because you suddenly see things that were previously hidden in the darkness.
Because of the amount time taken with such photographs, do you think it requires more expertise than other forms of photography? Yes, I do think that this type of photography requires a little more experience. How do your photographs compare now to when you first started out? I feel the same when I see the first pictures of my “Night Landscapes” to the most recent ones created. Now I know exactly how to get the desired result as quickly as possible. Would you consider any other career? No, not really, though we hear constantly how bad things are for our industry and there will be a prosperous future for only a few of us. I try not to be discouraged and I am fully committed to giving everything to be one of the ones that can be prosperous. So I don’t really have a plan B.
nei farquh an interview with
Neil Farquharson is a photographer from Edinburgh with a passion for landscape and seascape shots. Originally a programmer by profession he enjoys the technical aspects behind his gorgeous photography and generously lends his expertise to others through online tutorials.
il harson
What inspired you to become a photographer? And then further into experimenting in Long Exposure photography. When I started, a friend had been into photography for a few years. We chat a LOT on ICQ and a much of what he was talking about was photography. He made it sound pretty interesting and I was eventually convinced to buy my first ever camera - A Nikon D50. He kept me right about shooting raw, getting a tripod, a remote and filters and also of course - the lens. As luck would have it we both share a preference for landscapes, and in particular seascapes. Long exposure in seascapes is a natural progression. As a beginner, you take your shots and not knowing any better, you’re happy enough with them. But then you see your first long exposure and you’re like... fuck me that’s awesome. How’d u do that?! The initial research on the technique, for me, is a lot of the fun. I enjoy trying to work out how things are done. Like any new technique you learn - and while I’m talking about landscape photography, I’m sure other fields (excuse the pun) also have different techniques they can employ - there is a habit of doing it to exclusion of everything else. Another classic example of this is HDR. You find out about it, get excited then produce almost nothing else until you finally find a groove then perhaps move on to something else.
What other styles/types of photography have interested you the most during your career? Not much really, not a fan of portrait stuff, urban stuff etc. I tried a bit of strobist stuff both indoors and outdoors. As well as some illuminated landscapes. Both of which I enjoy but I do find it difficult to create scenarios for the shoot - I get as far as “cool strobist lit shot of a hot chick pointing a gun - maybe using a smoke machine!” and kinda get stuck. I do interiors, product photography and staff shoots as part of my web development work but to be honest I don’t find them particularly interesting. As the majority of shoots must be quite time consuming. Do you plan a trip, planning where and when you want to go? Or are they more spontaneous? Well, our definition of spontaneous is likely to differ. For example, today is Tuesday; I got an email offering to get out at the “weekend” - that is spontaneous for me. However I do a lot of planning before any trip. I check the location in Google Earth (if I’ve never been), the weather (via more than one website weathermen are liars) and I’ll use Google Maps to work out journey times - as we’re shooting sunrise/sunset, timing is everything. Given that petrol is pretty dear it’s cheaper to go shooting with others. Most of my buddies have kids so getting a time we can all get out is nigh on impossible!
Irrespective though, long exposures themselves don’t really cut into my time shooting. It just lowers the number of shots I take. A trip, sunrise or sunset, would tend to be about 2 hours shooting time. During a trip I may come away with anything between 5 and 15 final shots - depending on the number of long exposures I take.
Also, as I shoot RAW and bracket, the whole “get the exposure spot on” issue isn’t really that big a deal - let the camera work it out. It’s better at it than I am anyway. I’m quite happy to do the processing back home where it’s warm. As for the result not matching expectations - Happy accidents I can live with, the unhappy ones are part of learning so it’s all good there too.
What is your thought and actual implementation process? Do you try and imagine the end product? Would you consider it a waste of time if the outcome is not correct first time given the amount of time involved?
Because of the amount time taken with such photographs, do you think it requires more expertise than other forms of photography?
I see the composition through the viewfinder. I can’t see any photos at all without a camera in my face. Some people are lucky in that they see shots before they take them but unfortunately I’m not one of them. I can see how I’d process a shot once it’s in the camera but that’s about it as far as my latent creativity goes. I stick to the basic rules - e.g. the rule of thirds. Which like any rule should be broken sometimes! I spend way more time concentrating on framing than I do about exposure, white balance, aperture etc. Landscape photography tends to use the same basic camera setup all the time so there’s not too much to think about other than the composition.
Not really. Plop me in front of a bunch of kids to be shot and I won’t know where to start. The long exposure stuff I’ve learned is of little use in this situation. Each type of photography has it’s own techniques and methods of working - not all of them cross over. Nor am I sure that the time it takes to take an individual frame has much bearing on how knowledgeable a photographer may or may not be. LE does teach you about exposure times and how to achieve them. Landscapes, in general, have also taught me about depth of field. Although scapers tend to just want to maximise DOF, knowing how to do so and what you had to change to do so lets you intuit how to do it the other way. I.E. for portrait work for example. Having a shallow DOF can be a great tool for isolating your subject. But anyway, I’m getting off topic.
How do your photographs compare now to when you first started out? Have they become more personal to you? I’m not sure there is a huge difference to be honest. I mean technique is vastly improved because I have a sturdy tripod now, I use high quality filters. I got a remote. And my post-processing is light years ahead of where I was. But the essence of what I want to create is still exactly the same. In my personal gallery, I’m quite anal about tagging my photos. It’s interesting to compare 2006 (my first year with a camera) with later years. What is instantly apparent is that back then I was less discerning about what I’d point my camera at - today I barely get excited about anything that isn’t a sunrise or sunset! I guess all my shots are personal - I didn’t really think it was until a friend and I started playing “out of ten” for each others work.“What do you mean 5 out of 10? THAT’S AN 11!” How important is the editing post-shoot, compared to the actual photography? For me it’s definitely part of the fun. I’m a nerd by choice and computers are work and play for me. The advent of a digital darkroom is definitely a reason I got interested in photography - the idea of messing around with chemicals, or worse paying someone, to develop my photos doesn’t interest me. In fact without a digital darkroom I would never have gotten into photography in a big way.
Nor am I someone who gets a kick out of minimal processing either. I like processing my stuff. I like it, sometimes, to look like it maybe wasn’t shot on our planet - relatively easy to do when you go mad with the white balance. I have a friend who produces work you can guarantee that the scene he presents in his photos is EXACTLY like it was when he shot it. I find this a little dull myself - on the flip side he can’t stand the shots where I take liberties with reality. Do you think the emergence of Photoshop and other software has helped or hindered the photography industry? It gives photographers an easier and faster way to edit images but does it take away some of the raw essence and character of the photographs taken? I am not someone who regards what comes out of my camera as sacrosanct or even fully creative. For me it’s only half way done. It still needs to be completed in the digital darkroom. The camera is only one of the tools in the process of seeing the shot to printing it. I’m not too interested in learning how to get the best out of the camera white balance, colour space, saturation/contrast/sharpness etc, the camera scene modes don’t interest me either. I find the camera an uncomfortable place to process images. What’s more, everything I learned about optimising a D50 would have been utterly useless if I moved to a different brand (or even model) of camera.
My computer is built with just this sort of thing in mind and coupled with tools like Photoshop does a much better job of it than any camera ever will. So for me, post-processing tools are a necessity. Just as necessary as decent technique, a tripod, filters and a desire to get out there.
SOURCES & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Jakob Wagner www.jakobwagner.eu
Justin Quinnel & Michael Wesely Images from: www.itchyi.co.uk
Neil Farquharson www.verdantvista.com
Many thanks go to Jakob Wagner
and Neil Farquharson for the detailed answers, fantastic photography and precious time they gave up to help with this research project. And to Chris Venables for his guidance throughout.