Re: Interesting experiment with *ist-D
Hi, Rob S. wrote: On 6 Jan 2004 at 8:24, mike.wilson wrote: http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/channel/1/extra/new/display/985378 Oh my, someone's found a use for the multi-expo, isn't that a pretty pic :-) What a coincidence that I should trip over that image within minutes of your query, which I had not seen. Windmill shots and multiple shots of people moving are all I've ever seen this function being used for. I find it odd that the perpetrator of the linked shot decided to use such a cluttered foreground for what could have turned out to be such a striking er, image 8-) Leading to the next question - if there was enough wind to turn the blades, why is the vegetation unblurred? I see the very tops are moving but I would expect more. Maybe that is another exposure He lists nine exposures but I can only count 15 blades which, divided by the normal three, gives a five exposure shot. The conifers and birches/aspens could be separate exposures. mike
Re: Interesting experiment with *ist-D
On 6 Jan 2004 at 13:54, mike.wilson wrote: if there was enough wind to turn the blades, why is the vegetation unblurred? I see the very tops are moving but I would expect more. Maybe that is another exposure He lists nine exposures but I can only count 15 blades which, divided by the normal three, gives a five exposure shot. The conifers and birches/aspens could be separate exposures. I make it five shots too, since the multi-exposure function is additive the post of the turbine would make overwrite the foreground bushes so I guess it's all the one scene. Maybe the perspective makes the height deceptive and often standing below there is little breeze even though the turbine is spinning at quite a rate. From recollection wind speed at 35 metres will generally be at least twice that at ground level, most turbines are at least 25m above ground. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Interesting experiment with *ist-D
Hi, Rob Studdert wrote: I make it five shots too, since the multi-exposure function is additive the post of the turbine would make overwrite the foreground bushes so I guess it's all the one scene. Maybe the perspective makes the height deceptive and often standing below there is little breeze even though the turbine is spinning at quite a rate. From recollection wind speed at 35 metres will generally be at least twice that at ground level, most turbines are at least 25m above ground. They generally are big sods, those turbines 8-) If he exposed the trees after the blades, surely they would overwrite the pillar? It's really niggling me now, to find out where the other four exposures are. mike
Re: Interesting experiment with *ist-D
On 6 Jan 2004 at 19:50, mike wilson wrote: They generally are big sods, those turbines 8-) If he exposed the trees after the blades, surely they would overwrite the pillar? It's really niggling me now, to find out where the other four exposures are. Try it, it works just like multiple exposure on film, the light areas add per pic. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
