Sep 6, 2007, 21:57
Consider this a world exclusive: there's probably nobody else who's odd enough to combine the ultra-wide photography that the Olympus 7-14 allows with long exposures in daylight. There's one very good reason why I suspect nobody's ever done it: the 7-14 has a bulbous front element and isn't threaded for filters. More on that later.
![[Image: matthewpiers2007-9062974-wehi.jpg]](http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y275/robertsonphoto/matthewpiers2007-9062974-wehi.jpg)
The photo of Toronto's City Hall is a full-width crop of the original frame. Taken at f/8 in broad daylight, I had to use iso200 to keep the exposure at a manageable sixty seconds.
![[Image: matthewpiers2007-9062979-1.jpg]](http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y275/robertsonphoto/matthewpiers2007-9062979-1.jpg)
The monument for the Boer War was photographed at the same ISO200 and f/8, but stronger sunlight called for a short thirty-second exposure.
![[Image: matthewpiers2007-9062983-1.jpg]](http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y275/robertsonphoto/matthewpiers2007-9062983-1.jpg)
My personal favourite, this shot was at iso200, f/5.6, and sixty seconds. I like the 'detail' of the tree blurring in the corner, and any photo with a legible street sign is a good photo for me. This and the memorial have both had some of the extreme perspective distortions removed in photoshop.
The 4/3 forum that I'm on has a monthly contest, and the theme this fortnight is "Long Exposure". Having won the last competition, I have a little more freedom to play and experiment. That got me thinking about an article I read in Outdoor Photographer about daylight photos with extremely dark neutral density filters. Coupling that with the unfilterable ultrawide was too good to miss.
To take these photos I had to build a DIY filter. A 20"x24" sheet of 3-stop ND gel was cut down to six 8x10 rectangles, which went into a photo frame that's made to suspend a print between two sheets of glass. A total of $16 in material gives a serviceable 18-stop ND filter that's large enough to hold in front of the lens. Its weakness is that it reflects everything so there must be a completely light-tight seal between the camera and filter. It's killer flare: the smallest light leak will wipe out the contrast and burn out a portion of the image. A heavy black towel and then a second larger black cloth attached with a staple-gun provided a seal on the front, and clips and generous wrapping sealed the open end around the camera and tripod head. With the time to set up each shot, and two minutes to take the exposure and subtraction-frame, this is a very slow process. Even then less than half of my photos were leak-free.
The image quality is about what you'd expect when shooting through two cheap panes of glass and six layers of filters that aren't really meant to be in front of a lens. For a minute. It's not stellar. But beyond the sharpness loss I was surprised by the colour, which is completely stripped out and replaced by a warm red. These both look like problems that don't exist for commercial filters, although B+W does mention that its 10-stop filter has a warmer cast than its 6-stop filter.
So, why bother?
Part of the appeal is testing out a particular something that, as far as I know, has never been done before. (I'm probably not even close to the first...) While I was initially disappointed by the quality of my $16 rig, I've since come to enjoy their individuality and unique look. It feels like it takes out some of the digital in photography, and the daylight photos of empty streets reminds me of the early experiments in fixing images, which required much longer exposures than these. There's certainly more of this work in my future.
For practical purposes, ultra-dark ND filters do have several uses. The simplest would be for photographing extremely bright objects (the sun, welding processes...) safely. Another use, and one that I can see being more practical, is that any moving people or traffic will blur into nonexistence. I see a new purchase in my near future....
![[Image: matthewpiers2007-9062974-wehi.jpg]](http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y275/robertsonphoto/matthewpiers2007-9062974-wehi.jpg)
The photo of Toronto's City Hall is a full-width crop of the original frame. Taken at f/8 in broad daylight, I had to use iso200 to keep the exposure at a manageable sixty seconds.
![[Image: matthewpiers2007-9062979-1.jpg]](http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y275/robertsonphoto/matthewpiers2007-9062979-1.jpg)
The monument for the Boer War was photographed at the same ISO200 and f/8, but stronger sunlight called for a short thirty-second exposure.
![[Image: matthewpiers2007-9062983-1.jpg]](http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y275/robertsonphoto/matthewpiers2007-9062983-1.jpg)
My personal favourite, this shot was at iso200, f/5.6, and sixty seconds. I like the 'detail' of the tree blurring in the corner, and any photo with a legible street sign is a good photo for me. This and the memorial have both had some of the extreme perspective distortions removed in photoshop.
The 4/3 forum that I'm on has a monthly contest, and the theme this fortnight is "Long Exposure". Having won the last competition, I have a little more freedom to play and experiment. That got me thinking about an article I read in Outdoor Photographer about daylight photos with extremely dark neutral density filters. Coupling that with the unfilterable ultrawide was too good to miss.
To take these photos I had to build a DIY filter. A 20"x24" sheet of 3-stop ND gel was cut down to six 8x10 rectangles, which went into a photo frame that's made to suspend a print between two sheets of glass. A total of $16 in material gives a serviceable 18-stop ND filter that's large enough to hold in front of the lens. Its weakness is that it reflects everything so there must be a completely light-tight seal between the camera and filter. It's killer flare: the smallest light leak will wipe out the contrast and burn out a portion of the image. A heavy black towel and then a second larger black cloth attached with a staple-gun provided a seal on the front, and clips and generous wrapping sealed the open end around the camera and tripod head. With the time to set up each shot, and two minutes to take the exposure and subtraction-frame, this is a very slow process. Even then less than half of my photos were leak-free.
The image quality is about what you'd expect when shooting through two cheap panes of glass and six layers of filters that aren't really meant to be in front of a lens. For a minute. It's not stellar. But beyond the sharpness loss I was surprised by the colour, which is completely stripped out and replaced by a warm red. These both look like problems that don't exist for commercial filters, although B+W does mention that its 10-stop filter has a warmer cast than its 6-stop filter.
So, why bother?
Part of the appeal is testing out a particular something that, as far as I know, has never been done before. (I'm probably not even close to the first...) While I was initially disappointed by the quality of my $16 rig, I've since come to enjoy their individuality and unique look. It feels like it takes out some of the digital in photography, and the daylight photos of empty streets reminds me of the early experiments in fixing images, which required much longer exposures than these. There's certainly more of this work in my future.
For practical purposes, ultra-dark ND filters do have several uses. The simplest would be for photographing extremely bright objects (the sun, welding processes...) safely. Another use, and one that I can see being more practical, is that any moving people or traffic will blur into nonexistence. I see a new purchase in my near future....