Adventures in Long Exposure

The technique of long exposure photography, purposely using exposure times ranging from several seconds to several minutes or more to create time dependent effects such as giving flowing water a gossamer appearance or creating continuous light trails from the motion of stars or tail-lights, is nothing new. As you may already be aware however over the past several years the popularity of using long exposures in landscape and architectural photography, not just as a special technique reserved for particular kinds of situations, but as a sort of de facto approach that can be applied nearly any time something in the frame is moving, has been growing to become almost a style of photography unto itself. For many well known and highly talented photographers it has become somewhat of a signature look.

An exposure of several minutes I made last year. Lacking the near-opaque neutral density filter often considered requisite for long exposure photography my attempts at long exposures like this were limited to those two narrow time bands each day when the sun was just far enough below the horizon to permit extended exposure times. A bit too dark and exposure times quickly climb from minutes to several hours - far longer than I was willing to wait it out. 

While a deep appreciation for the work of many of these photographers has lead me to incorporate long exposure into my own, I have to confess I'm a little leery about it. The technique seems to be most commonly applied today in a way that is right up my ally photographically speaking, to use the motion of ripples and waves to transform the textured glassy surface of oceans, lakes, firths and so forth into something that appears far less substantial, a mist perhaps. Clouds, meanwhile, often shed all pretense of being stationary when exposures go on for more than just a few seconds. As a result fairly ordinary scenes can take on an air of mystery, a juxtaposition of the familiar and the other-worldly.  Had I ever sat down to write a photographic manifesto the previous sentence would probably feel right at home among its pages, so what's not to love?

A small part of it at least was simply cost. Photographers who regularly use long exposure techniques typically recommend a 10 stop neutral density filter, at least as a start, and maybe a few more 2-4 stop filters to stack on top of that when 10 isn't enough. Considering the advice I find tends to come from photographers for whom long exposure plays a big roll in their work, and who typically are working with larger budgets than a schmoe such as myself, some rather premium brands get mentioned. By far the most commonly cited is the Lee Big Stopper, a square drop-in filter requiring an adapter ring and holder (ideally for each lens) which would easily run me over $200 once all is said and done. Considering that's what I paid for my most prized component of my RB67 system, the 50mm Sekor C lens, it wasn't something I could see ever working its way up to the part of my priority list where things get bought. Fortunately with a bit of digging I was able to find a generic 10 stop filter for under $20. So far it's proven to be perfectly adequate and if long exposure proves to be a more satisfying creative outlet than I've been thinking I can always upgrade.

A more recent photo made through a 10x neutral density filter in order to achieve a 90 second total exposure time. Using Fuji Neopan Acros film eased exposure calculations somewhat a no reciprocity adjustments are required for exposures up to two minutes.

Somehow I'm not seeing it happening though. There are things to be lost as well as gained when this technique is used. I don't always like what it does for the look of clouds for example. There are also times when the surface of the water as it appears when exposures are short enough to freeze its motion is what works best. For an example of this have a look at the first photo in my previous post and note the texture of the water  and how it helps tell the story of churning winds and sunlight. I would be quite a different photo if the shutter were kept open long enough to allow this motion to blur into a sea of marshmallow fluff. Arguably it might still be an interesting photo, it just wouldn't say what I wanted it to in this case.

This might be why, despite my interest in experimenting with long exposures and my belief that it may be the key to getting the right look in some circumstances, I have no ambitions of making it a signature look of my own. When looking through the work of photographers who turn to the technique time and time again I can sometimes get a little numbed by a certain sameness of feel. It leaves me to wonder if for some photographers the heavy neutral density filters are being brought to bear out of habit. I have my own filter to play with now so it remains to be seen how it goes for me. As always I'll keep you posted.