Posted by Carol Nichols on September 7, 2011 at 1:06 PM
I've recently been looking at my fall foliage images from past years in anticipation of a trip I will be taking in October. It seems I'm not real happy with the sharpness in the images which is most probably due to wind blowing the leaves on the trees. I'm wondering if there is a minimum speed I should keep in mind when taking foliage photos when the wind is blowing (as it usually seems to be). In avian photography there is a minimum speed I keep in mind to get sharp images of birds in flight, so that is why I am wondering about a minimum speed for foliage photography. Any thoughts in this regard would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
I’m no expert and I hope some folks with more experience and knowledge will chime in, but here are my thoughts.
Landscape photography will be very different than avian photography.
I’m guessing that in avian photography you have the luxury of a large aperture and may be shooting in brighter light much of the time and as you know, this is not always the case in landscape photography in fact never if you worship the pink clouds like a lot of us do.
I think there are too many variables to simply state a minimum shutter speed in order to stop the movement of the windblown trees. The wind speed, aperture size, iso capabilities of the camera, density of the polarizer (gotta cut the glare from those leaves) and the distance of the trees are some that come to mind.
One may not be able to attain the desired shutter speed after satisfying the aperture factor, regardless of the iso speed.
Although landscape photographers will crank up the iso in order to speed up the shutter when the flowers are windblown, other factors like aperture/ depth of field, focus and framing are in the forefront of our minds as we compose the shot. If after you have satisfied these factors and need to speed up the shutter, your only choice may be to crank up the iso and as you know, noise is a factor at higher iso’s and even then, one may not be able stop the leaves at the highest iso setting.
On a windy day I might want to shoot distant trees with a larger aperture for a faster shutter speed, but for the comp where I need close and far objects in focus I have no choice but to use the smaller aperture. Yes, focus blending is all the rage and is used to increase DOF but I think that these shots are mostly done with little or no wind, so this may not be an option for you.
I’m sure you are correct in you assessment of your photos, but how are you focusing your landscape shots? I have found that live view has been a life saver for me. I have been able improve my shots considerably when live view is combined with the DOF preview button.
Do you use a tripod for your landscape shots? Can you post up a few of your tree shots?
Sorry if this is no help….
Posted by Bruce Painter on September 8, 2011 at 11:33 AM
Movement in foliage always seems to be a problem especailly with more intimate scenes like the streams that I like to photograph. The best time for those scenes is early morning which means low light and slow shutter speeds. Sometimes in the 2 - 6 sec range. While there are certainly much more qualified landscape photographers here than myself one trick that I use is to look for the one or two leaves that seem to be moving the most even with the wind not a max volume. Then I watch those and and try to trip the shutter when they seem to calm down. I also listen to the ebb and flow of the wind through the trees to help try to anticipate when those lower wind volumes will hit the subject. It doesn't always work but sometimes I get lucky. Then some days it's just an effert in futility so I try not to get frustrated and enjoy the beauty around me and do the best I can, or give up on those scenes and change subjects.
I know that was not a direct answer to your question but I hope it helps.
Bruce
Posted by Kent Staubus on September 8, 2011 at 9:43 PM
I live in the Land of Wind. Here's what I do. I either shoot at dawn or dusk when the wind dies down. When it's really windy (wind here can blow trucks off the interstate,) I put on an ND filter, stop the lens down, and lower ISO so I can get something like a 2s exposure.
Kent in SD
Posted by Carol Nichols on September 8, 2011 at 10:23 PM
Thanks for your responses. A good example of what I am talking about is my recent post in the Weekly Challenge Gallery, "Path Around the Park", that you can see in my Gallery. I always use a tripod when shooting landscape photos. Unfortunately I don't have live view in my current camera, but will when I upgrade next year. I'm really looking forward to that. I like Bruce's idea of looking at one or two leaves to see when the wind is blowing and when it stops. I think that with live view I should be able to set up my composition and then zoom into the leaves as much as possible on the LCD to check for when the wind is blowing. That sounds like a good idea.
Posted by David Kingham on September 9, 2011 at 12:19 AM
Try not stopping down so much, that shot will probably be sharp at f11, then you've gained a stop of shutter speed, if it's still moving you will still get great results at iso 400 to gain another stop
Posted by John Mumaw on September 9, 2011 at 7:34 AM
I think that David nailed it re: that particular image.
I agree with the recommendation not to stop down so far, given the nature of the shot in question. Going to f/11 rather than f/22 will actually gain you two stops worth of shutter speed, meaning that the shot could have been executed at 1/60 sec. which is fast enough to eliminate foliage laden wind blur unless it's blowing a gale. You don't have an element in the very near foreground, so you should have plenty of DOF at f/11 (maybe even f/8) to retain critical sharpness throughout. You'll also benefit by being able to avoid any diffraction-related issues that might pop up at f/22.
Where this sort of thing gets tricky is if you have a shot where you do have to stop down to f/16 or beyond to obtain the necessary DOF and/or you have an element (moving water, for instance) that dictates a slow shutter speed, plus foliage and wind. Here's an example of a shot where this sort of consideration comes into play. In that case, you're really at the mercy of the wind and you have to be patient and wait for it to die down. As was mentioned in a note above, there are often specific areas of foliage in a scene that seem to be particularly likely to catch the wind; in the field, I try to seek these out and keep an eye on them, and be ready to trip the shutter when they're still.
Posted by Yiming Hu on September 9, 2011 at 10:10 AM
My experience is that you can always wait for the calm period --- it might last for only seconds, but that's good enough.
If it is really windy that I will let the wind work for me by capturing the movements of the leaves and branches.
Posted by Roger Rouch on September 10, 2011 at 9:00 PM
On top of what has been said....
If the wind is intermitent, it's not too easy to predict a gap when it's not blowing. If I like a scene enough I will take many identical exposures hoping to catch a quiet time. When I get home I quickly delete the ones with blur. I generally have my camera set on mirror lock up and self-timer of a couple of seconds, which makes catching a quiet time even harder
Weather reports and forecasts can be helpful in making a determination as to whether or not wind will be an issue from incoming or passing fronts, or thunderstorms. They can also be helpful in predicting whether diurnal winds will be a problem.
When a high and a low interact, the wind will blow from the high toward the low. The greater the difference in air pressure between the high and low, the faster the wind speed will be. The wind direction is also somewhat predictable. If there are thunderstorms, all bets are off since the winds can change direction and intensity without warning.
Diurnal winds are those that occur due to daytime heating and evening cooling of the atmosphere. The up-slope/up-canyon winds begin in the morning. Night time diurnal winds blow down-slope/down-canyon. The take away is that there are periods of time in the morning and evening when the atmosphere is in equilbrium, with the result that there is little or no wind. This is the time to make photographs. I will add that the more familiar with the area you become, the easier it will be to predict local conditions.
Since I shoot 4x5 color transparency film with an ISO of 100 with its attendant long shutter times, I will plan to shoot in wind sheltered locations, or time my exposure when the wind will not affect objects that require critical sharpness. If it's too windy for marbles, I'll either put the camera away, or make photos of rocks.
To my mind, making lots of exposures in the hope that some will be sharp is a waste of time and effort. Would it not be better to make an educated prediction of conditions and do a little scouting to increase one's productivity?
If you are shooting from far away and it is a breezy day then hang out for awhile and keep shooting. When you get home go back through your images and sort of the sharpest ones. You'll get a couple for sure. Blend if necessary. Unless it is really windy, I'd say you are fine between 1/60 + 1/80 of a second. Also, depending on your camera you can default to a lower ISO (up to 400 is perfectly acceptable on the 5DMK2) to get some speed back.
Discussion
11 repliesLandscape photography will be very different than avian photography.
I’m guessing that in avian photography you have the luxury of a large aperture and may be shooting in brighter light much of the time and as you know, this is not always the case in landscape photography in fact never if you worship the pink clouds like a lot of us do.
I think there are too many variables to simply state a minimum shutter speed in order to stop the movement of the windblown trees. The wind speed, aperture size, iso capabilities of the camera, density of the polarizer (gotta cut the glare from those leaves) and the distance of the trees are some that come to mind.
One may not be able to attain the desired shutter speed after satisfying the aperture factor, regardless of the iso speed.
Although landscape photographers will crank up the iso in order to speed up the shutter when the flowers are windblown, other factors like aperture/ depth of field, focus and framing are in the forefront of our minds as we compose the shot. If after you have satisfied these factors and need to speed up the shutter, your only choice may be to crank up the iso and as you know, noise is a factor at higher iso’s and even then, one may not be able stop the leaves at the highest iso setting.
On a windy day I might want to shoot distant trees with a larger aperture for a faster shutter speed, but for the comp where I need close and far objects in focus I have no choice but to use the smaller aperture. Yes, focus blending is all the rage and is used to increase DOF but I think that these shots are mostly done with little or no wind, so this may not be an option for you.
I’m sure you are correct in you assessment of your photos, but how are you focusing your landscape shots? I have found that live view has been a life saver for me. I have been able improve my shots considerably when live view is combined with the DOF preview button.
Do you use a tripod for your landscape shots? Can you post up a few of your tree shots?
Sorry if this is no help….
I know that was not a direct answer to your question but I hope it helps.
Bruce
Kent in SD
Where this sort of thing gets tricky is if you have a shot where you do have to stop down to f/16 or beyond to obtain the necessary DOF and/or you have an element (moving water, for instance) that dictates a slow shutter speed, plus foliage and wind. Here's an example of a shot where this sort of consideration comes into play. In that case, you're really at the mercy of the wind and you have to be patient and wait for it to die down. As was mentioned in a note above, there are often specific areas of foliage in a scene that seem to be particularly likely to catch the wind; in the field, I try to seek these out and keep an eye on them, and be ready to trip the shutter when they're still.
If it is really windy that I will let the wind work for me by capturing the movements of the leaves and branches.
If the wind is intermitent, it's not too easy to predict a gap when it's not blowing. If I like a scene enough I will take many identical exposures hoping to catch a quiet time. When I get home I quickly delete the ones with blur. I generally have my camera set on mirror lock up and self-timer of a couple of seconds, which makes catching a quiet time even harder
When a high and a low interact, the wind will blow from the high toward the low. The greater the difference in air pressure between the high and low, the faster the wind speed will be. The wind direction is also somewhat predictable. If there are thunderstorms, all bets are off since the winds can change direction and intensity without warning.
Diurnal winds are those that occur due to daytime heating and evening cooling of the atmosphere. The up-slope/up-canyon winds begin in the morning. Night time diurnal winds blow down-slope/down-canyon. The take away is that there are periods of time in the morning and evening when the atmosphere is in equilbrium, with the result that there is little or no wind. This is the time to make photographs. I will add that the more familiar with the area you become, the easier it will be to predict local conditions.
Since I shoot 4x5 color transparency film with an ISO of 100 with its attendant long shutter times, I will plan to shoot in wind sheltered locations, or time my exposure when the wind will not affect objects that require critical sharpness. If it's too windy for marbles, I'll either put the camera away, or make photos of rocks.
To my mind, making lots of exposures in the hope that some will be sharp is a waste of time and effort. Would it not be better to make an educated prediction of conditions and do a little scouting to increase one's productivity?
--P