Seagrass movement...

Whenever I dive on reefs with seagrass, one always see the seagrass moving from side to side in the swell.

However when you take photos using flash etc you loose this. In the two images below I used an olympus

e300 with no strobes 14mm-45mm lens and 0.25 adapter in a pt-e01 housing.

I used a very slow shutter 1 second and F22 on both. I did almost no editing except for color balance

and cropping on the 2nd image.

Photography is very subjective - so did the result below bring the "movement factor" into the shot

or does it just look like a blurr....?

Thanks for your opinion - good or bad.

I think this is a tough one; yes some movement is conveyed but the shot does not work for me in conveying the gentle swaying motion. Maybe some type of multiple strobe exposure would work - sort of stroboscopic effect.

I think it works in the first image, but because the soft coral (?) is moving as well, too much is going on in the second image (the seagrass is also in the background). (I actually thought it was camera shake for a moment)

Maybe try a few more shutter speeds as well, maybe a bit shorter, so there is a sense of direction, or way longer to stick everything together.. You could even try the slow shutter speed and the strobe. Because the seagrass is moving back and forth, it doesnt matter at which end the curtain syncs.

I like the first one, and love the idea. I might play with shortening the shutter times also.

Steve

....

Photography is very subjective - so did the result below bring the "movement factor" into the shot

or does it just look like a blurr....?

 

Thanks for your opinion - good or bad.

...

I think it is working in the first one... certainly worth experimenting with.

Coincidentally I was checking out new member Kari post's website the other day, and saw a very nice example of this technique in an autumnal forest. You need to click on the portfolio link to see it.

I think they always work best if there is something significant in the image that is stable/still/sharp to give a reference point.

Keep up the in-camera techniques, great to see people exploring what the camera can do, not just fiddling around in post. You will be amazed at the things you can do in-camera when you know how.

I love the concept.The problem is lack of flow. I woud suggest rotating the image about 30 to 45 degrees, then recrop to give it more of a flow left to right and up. Just an idea

Thanks for the comments.

Ultimately what I would have liked to do: was create the same idea when photographing

a river or moving water at a slow shutter speed - to get that liquid effect.

However the seagrass is not moving very fast. So I found by using anything faster than

a 1 sec I did not have much movement at all. I would have liked to even go slower

with a 2 second etc, but my aperture was already maximum at F22 - so 2 sec etc

was getting over exposed.

Adding flash would have stopped the "liquid effect" (I did have a two flashes with me which

I switched off for these shots)

I think having a stable strong non-moving base (e..g. nice coral pinnacle) in the photo is very

important to show that the image isn't because of camera movement.

For the next try I will maybe go late afternoon when less light is available to get even

slower shutter speeds.

Cheers

Nikki

You could add a neutral density filter if your camera allows.

Depending on how keen you really are, you could also consider a tripod. do a search on "tripod" - there is quit a lot of conversation about tripods on here. Here is one good thread.

I'd be careful mentioning the use of coral or other marine life as a support. We should be looking and shooting but not touching. sorry my misread of the last post.

I'd be careful mentioning the use of coral or other marine life as a support. We should be looking and shooting but not touching.

The tripod is a great idea to make this shot possible. The other thing I was thinking about was finding a location and tide that would allow longer surge actions. ( more current) allowing longer exposures. Interesting balance though, more current = tougher shot.

Steve

I'm pretty sure Nikki was talking about the coral head in the image providing stability to the shot, to show the seagrass motion was intentional.

100% correct Steve. I was referring to having nice stable coral in the photo.

Not referring to coral as being a platform to use to stabilize the camera.

In this paticular area there are loads of sandy areas in between the coral and

seagrass and I used sand to stabilize myself. However a tripod would ultimately

be the key.

Also as Steve mentions - the stronger surge the harder it would be to stabilize

myself...

I think filters are a great idea and will work as it will take one or two F stops out

which means I can use even slower shutter speeds...

Thanks for the advice photovan.

Will go back and experiment some more.

Cheers

Nikki

I'm pretty sure Nikki was talking about the coral head in the image providing stability to the shot, to show the seagrass motion was intentional.

Oops sorry Nikki, that'll teach me not to read posts just once I'll edit that post to remove the inference.

darren

Nice idea.

I like the first one with the sea grass, this is clear motion! I would try to get the (fixed) coral closer (or even as main subject in front). I'll have to try this!