Shooting a model by waterfall

mr tommo

mr tommo

mr tommo

Soldato
Joined
13 Dec 2004
Posts
5,398
Location
Stoke-on-Trent
Hi guys, I've really got into my photography over the last few months. All studio based model portfolio work.

I really want to start getting a fashion portfolio together which will all be location work. Luckily for me my GF does a little modelling and so I've got someone who's willing to spend hours with me while I practice and find the right locations etc.

First things first though... I promised her a waterfall shoot. Basically something like her sitting on a rock or actually in shallow water with the water falling behind her and flowing around.

What kind of shutter speeds am I looking at to get that water flow effect? How do I get around the problem of her moving while the shutters open?

Obviously I could go and try but its going to be a full day out and I don't want to waste it and come back with nothing. Ive got access to Lots of DSLR's, quite a few lens, tripods, flash guns etc etc.

I could ask my dad but he's in bed and I want to know now :D
 
Hmmm, I presume you want the milky waterfall effect and to get that you are going to need a medium to long exposure, some people use a ND filter to allow them to shoot low enough speeds, although I did do a few of these in Iceland hand held thats some pretty fast moving water.

Your issue is getting your model to stay still to avoid blurring and also getting the waterfall blurred so I'd say you have two workable solutions either; kill and stuff the model, I know you are already stuffing her, but I mean in a taxidermy style, or you could shoot at two different speeds and post process them together, I would say the second option is probably more complicated but less likely to incur a long jail sentence.

MB
 
My first thought is cheat the shot.......Take two photographs, one with the model at a fast shutter speed to get her in focus etc, then remove the model and take the waterfall at a slower shutter speed to get the required 'flow' afterwards merge the two images for the final production photograph.

Just how i would do it.
 
Derek W said:
My first thought is cheat the shot.......Take two photographs, one with the model at a fast shutter speed to get her in focus etc, then remove the model and take the waterfall at a slower shutter speed to get the required 'flow' afterwards merge the two images for the final production photograph.

Just how i would do it.
Click to expand...

yep, me too.

Sadly, I've got an image in my head of the model behind a waterfall with just her head sticking through it and all the water in the misty effect.

Now thats a ball ache to shoot!!

Good luck son :)
 
Well it really depends how fast the water going I've done some really fast waterfall shots that only needed 1-2 seconds exposures for the really blurry effect, I'm sure a model could stay still for 1-2 seconds?
Your defiantly need an ND filter, the exact number depends on the waterfall and light on the day etc.
If you get some good ones post them up :D
 
You could do it in two shots but the exposures would be very different and you'll need moderate blending skills in photoshop.

A well set up flash system will allow you to set a long exposure for the scene allowing ambient light to expose the scene and the flash for the model.
You'll be playing a lot setting that up though and will require good understanding of flash.
 
Here is a self portrait I did at a small waterfall almost 2 years ago.
long exposure of around a couple of seconds I think.
staying still is pretty much key here.
There is no soft element of this picture anywhere. Its like time was frozen on me.

If I had more flash units I would have done it the way I discribed above.

selfportrait.jpg
 
Firstly thanks for taking the time to reply:)


Matblack said:
Hmmm, I presume you want the milky waterfall effect and to get that you are going to need a medium to long exposure, some people use a ND filter to allow them to shoot low enough speeds, although I did do a few of these in Iceland hand held thats some pretty fast moving water.

Your issue is getting your model to stay still to avoid blurring and also getting the waterfall blurred so I'd say you have two workable solutions either; kill and stuff the model, I know you are already stuffing her, but I mean in a taxidermy style, or you could shoot at two different speeds and post process them together, I would say the second option is probably more complicated but less likely to incur a long jail sentence.

MB
Click to expand...
I don't want to kill her just yet :D so I think maybe option 2 is the better bet :p

Thanks, I've yet to pick a location but Im looking out for locations all the time.

diverse180 said:
The following link has some basic info / advice which might help you

http://digital-photography-school.com/waterfall-digital-photography

As for not wanting to spend a whole day out...why not? If you have access to all that equipment, and a willing model, then I'd try shooting at different times of the day and see what you come up with :)

...be sure to post some shots after you do the shoot :)
Click to expand...

I've just read your your link, thaks for that it was very useful.

Oh I will be spending all day out its just I wanted to be sure I cracked this shot for her.


vcl_X1 said:
Best way is balance flash with daylight, light GF with the flash and then set the shutter speed to give yourself the desired effect with the water.
Click to expand...

See this is my problem, Im fine in a studio with lighting etc, but I haven't a clue about using a flash with the camera or balancing :confused:

Derek W said:
My first thought is cheat the shot.......Take two photographs, one with the model at a fast shutter speed to get her in focus etc, then remove the model and take the waterfall at a slower shutter speed to get the required 'flow' afterwards merge the two images for the final production photograph.

Just how i would do it.
Click to expand...

I'm confident I'd be able to do this in photoshop but then for every shot I take of her, Id have to get her out of the way and it might be a bit of a pain. Will definately consider doing it though if that's what it takes.

blastman said:
yep, me too.

Sadly, I've got an image in my head of the model behind a waterfall with just her head sticking through it and all the water in the misty effect.

Now thats a ball ache to shoot!!

Good luck son :)
Click to expand...

Thanks :)



Septh said:
Well it really depends how fast the water going I've done some really fast waterfall shots that only needed 1-2 seconds exposures for the really blurry effect, I'm sure a model could stay still for 1-2 seconds?
Your defiantly need an ND filter, the exact number depends on the waterfall and light on the day etc.
If you get some good ones post them up :D
Click to expand...

Ive just checked and it seems all my dads old filters wont fit the lens :confused: The filters are seriously old though.

Fstop11 said:
You could do it in two shots but the exposures would be very different and you'll need moderate blending skills in photoshop.

A well set up flash system will allow you to set a long exposure for the scene allowing ambient light to expose the scene and the flash for the model.
You'll be playing a lot setting that up though and will require good understanding of flash.
Click to expand...

I was thinking Id get away with opening both layers and blending the 2 while very carefully erasing the area where the model is. Would that work?

Fstop11 said:
Here is a self portrait I did at a small waterfall almost 2 years ago.
long exposure of around a couple of seconds I think.
staying still is pretty much key here.
There is no soft element of this picture anywhere. Its like time was frozen on me.

If I had more flash units I would have done it the way I discribed above.

selfportrait.jpg
Click to expand...

See now that is excellent and exactly what I am after. You literally just made sure you didn't move for 2 seconds?

This is the flash I can take out with me...
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1011441

Is that going to be right for the job?
 
Last edited:
mr tommo said:
See now that is excellent and exactly what I am after. You literally just made sure you didn't move for 2 seconds?

This is the flash I can take out with me...
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1011441

Is that going to be right for the job?
Click to expand...

Thats right. I stayed ever so still.
selfportraitcloseup.jpg


That flash is a very sophisticated piece of kit and will provide more than enough light for your model. The only deal when doing these kinda shots where you are relying on the flash for model illunimation is that its better to be working with more than one flash.. Umbrellas would be much better as its the sole lighting condition for your model.

Just looked at the exif and it was 1/3 second exposure.
 
Last edited:
Fstop11 said:
Thats right. I stayed ever so still.
selfportraitcloseup.jpg


That flash is a very sophisticated piece of kit and will provide more than enough light for your model. The only deal when doing these kinda shots where you are relying on the flash for model illunimation is that its better to be working with more than one flash.. Umbrellas would be much better as its the sole lighting condition for your model.

Just looked at the exif and it was 1/3 second exposure.
Click to expand...


Ive just had a look through your seriously impressive portfolio, some of the images are jawdropping :cool:

I think what I'm failing to understand is...

Without the flash connected up to the camera, lets just say the shot looks fine at 1/60 @ f.8.

Then I don't understand what happens when the flash is incorporated?
Lets say that to get the water perfectly blurred like I want is 1 second - f14. - This will give me pretty much the same shot but with moving water.

But if the flash goes off during this 1 second won't the model be massively over exposed? Or am I being really dumb? :o
 
Thank you for taking the time to look at my portfolio. Thank you for the kind comments :)

I would if I was you. Go out there fully manual.
Firstly set up your scene on a tripod and probably using a ND filter aim to get about 1/3 of a second (like I have)
Its going to depend on the kinda waterfall. Basicially for the shake of your model just remember that you're going to want as fast a shutter speeds as possible on the slow end of the scale.
Expose the scene without the model. Once you have this its time to start bringing your flash into play. Now remember that a flash can only over expose a scene if its bouncing back into the camera so I would be using a sync cord to direct the flash so it only bounces back from the model.

Its slike firing a flash off into the sky. The sky is still black because nothing is returned.

I have no idea on what sort of settings that Metz flash has so you are going to have to have a play on that front.

The effect you are basically after is slow speed sync flash (which is wonderful for subjects but we're playing with a well exposed scene here too.

I gotta go out now but I'll see how you're getting on when I get back.
(typing this in a rush so sorry if it makes no sense)
 
Thanks for that post. Im thinking about dragging my friend somehwere tomorrow for a bit of practice.

I will certainly keep this thread active as its already helped me loads.

Im going to have a read up on the Slow sync tonight :)

Just noticed Melissa Giglia in your portfolio and then realised you were local, shes my best mates younger sister :)

Is this shot done in the same kind of way? http://purestorm.com/image.aspx?i=3...10l10504l11000l11536l10608l12765l12064l12210l
 
Last edited:
mr tommo said:
Thanks for that post. Im thinking about dragging my friend somehwere tomorrow for a bit of practice.

I will certainly keep this thread active as its already helped me loads.

Im going to have a read up on the Slow sync tonight :)

Just noticed Melissa Giglia in your portfolio and then realised you were local, shes my best mates younger sister :)

Is this shot done in the same kind of way? http://purestorm.com/image.aspx?i=3...10l10504l11000l11536l10608l12765l12064l12210l
Click to expand...
Oh yeah Melissa yeah I know her well. I shot her, Laura Ash, Charlotte Goodhall and some girl called Rachaels pre prom portraits.
Small world.

Yeah I am based in Congleton so I am very local to Stoke :)

I would deffo get some practice tomorrow friend, it'll take some adjustment.

That shot is probably slow speed sync indeed :)
 
mr tommo said:
See this is my problem, Im fine in a studio with lighting etc, but I haven't a clue about using a flash with the camera or balancing :confused:
Click to expand...

It's not that difficult, as you know the aperture determines your flash exposure so set that to light your model, then use this aperture to work out the shutter speed for the background exposure, you may get a little ghosting if the shutter speed is short, less so for longer exposures as the ambient light is so much dimmer than the flash, just ask her to keep still - also you may have the option to set front or rear curtain synch.

I think the multi exposure then blend option is as difficult unless you're using stacking software to stich the 2 together.
 
Thanks for that :)

Im definately going to go down the route of just the one shot.

I know its probably going to be a pain to get right but I'd much rather improve my photography than my photoshop skills.

Unfortunately my friend couldn't make it today so I'm thinking next weekend over the bank holiday. I will definately stick my results up in here and probably print a copy of some of the replies to take with me :D:o
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom