Nature Aspen Time Lapse

Aspen Time Lapse · 12:07 AM

Not a particularly good photo, kind of murky and indistinct, but an interesting one for me. We were driving in Zion a few weeks ago in a pretty heavy wind. I stopped at this spot to try for a time lapse of these aspen trees. This is a 4 second exposure. I took a whole slew of these while my wife waited patiently in the car and this was the best I could get. I'd like to try this again and experiment more with shutter speeds and distance from subject. I tried one from about 100 yards but you could barely see the movement of the leaves from that far away. I think this one may be too close to the two trees so that the movement looks too chaotic and muddled. Not even the tree trunks look sharp. I would be interested to hear from people who have got good results from trying this.

normhead · 10-30-2014, 09:30 AM

The results are entirely predictable... The base of the trunks where there is the least amount of movement are the sharpest. As you go up the tree the tree gets thinner, and the tree is going to move more. By the time you get to the top the movement of the tree may actually be measured in feet instead of inches and the movement will be extreme and cause significant motion blur, just like blurring a waterfall with a long exposure. I'm not really clear on what you were hoping for.

What would a "good result" be?

GeoJerry · 10-30-2014, 09:42 AM

Originally posted by normhead

The results are entirely predictable... The base of the trunks where there is the least amount of movement are the sharpest. As you go up the tree the tree gets thinner, and the tree is going to move more. By the time you get to the top the movement of the tree may actually be measured in feet instead of inches and the movement will be extreme and cause significant motion blur, just like blurring a waterfall with a long exposure. I'm not really clear on what you were hoping for.

Sure, of course. But wouldn't there be some distance and exposure time dependency on this effect? If I shot this picture from 200 feet away, you probably wouldn't see much movement at all except in the smaller branches and leaves. If I'd exposed for 2 secs instead of 4, maybe that would have cleaned up the trunks. If I'd used a wider angle, that could have made a difference. Or I could have waited around for the wind to die down a little.

I didn't really know what to expect except the effects you noted (which is why I wanted the lower part of the trunks at center, to give some stability and hopefully focus to the image), and I hadn't tried this before. I just wondered if others had experimented with the idea and what they found.

jimr-pdx · 10-30-2014, 10:18 AM

I think it's great, a cool concept and depending on the wind speed this is probably as good as it gets. As you say, being further back could sharpen the trunks a bit, but 'pretty heavy' wind could even shift the trunk a bit with all the leaves providing resistance.

I'm thinking this would be fun to try as a multiple-exposure image! Not sure that would help with the trunk though... now I need to try it

thanks for the thought!

normhead · 10-30-2014, 02:32 PM

Here's a shot I did in a strong wind.... but at 1/320 sec. Fast enough to freeze the tree trunks but not fast enough to freeze the leaf motion,,, I really like the effect.

GeoJerry · 10-30-2014, 02:50 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Here's a shot I did in a strong wind.... but at 1/320 sec. Fast enough to freeze the tree trunks but not fast enough to freeze the leaf motion,,, I really like the effect.

That's a great shot, and closer to what I had in mind, although I was going for more movement and so might have wanted a shutter speed more like 1/100 or 1/50 sec, and maybe a little bit closer in. Having the hills in the distance is a great touch because it gives the picture a good stable frame of reference. The faster shutter speed adds some more range to the leaf colors instead of mushing the leaves together into one dominant tone. I'll try for something more like this next time. It would take lots of trial and error to get a good result (meaning, something I like

GeoJerry · 10-30-2014, 05:17 PM

Originally posted by jimr-pdx

I think it's great, a cool concept and depending on the wind speed this is probably as good as it gets. As you say, being further back could sharpen the trunks a bit, but 'pretty heavy' wind could even shift the trunk a bit with all the leaves providing resistance.

I'm thinking this would be fun to try as a multiple-exposure image! Not sure that would help with the trunk though... now I need to try it

thanks for the thought!

Thanks jimr, I look forward to seeing what you come up with!

**Miguel** · 10-30-2014, 05:25 PM

Originally posted by GeoJerry

Not a particularly good photo, kind of murky and indistinct, but an interesting one for me. We were driving in Zion a few weeks ago in a pretty heavy wind. I stopped at this spot to try for a time lapse of these aspen trees. This is a 4 second exposure. I took a whole slew of these while my wife waited patiently in the car and this was the best I could get. I'd like to try this again and experiment more with shutter speeds and distance from subject. I tried one from about 100 yards but you could barely see the movement of the leaves from that far away. I think this one may be too close to the two trees so that the movement looks too chaotic and muddled. Not even the tree trunks look sharp. I would be interested to hear from people who have got good results from trying this.

I like this shot a lot. It seems very hallucinogenic with the colorful blurred leaves. My favorite part, actually,is the perspective. The two trees bisect the space to create an entry into the scene.
Well played.

M

45 Mike · 10-30-2014, 05:30 PM

It is a rather surreal effect. I like it. I think the subject composition lends itself to the effect.

GeoJerry · 10-30-2014, 09:37 PM

Miguel, Mike, thanks for your comments! I'd really like to try this again with some faster shutter speeds and a bit more distance (or maybe wait for a lull in the wind). I only had 10-15 minutes to play with this and it was so bright I couldn't really see in detail what kind of results I was getting. Will have to wait until next year I guess.

wkzsh54 · 10-30-2014, 10:30 PM

I also really like the pic as taken. It has an impressionistic feel to it. With the long exposure it might be interesting to try again with the same settings in lower light...

GeoJerry · 10-31-2014, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by wkzsh54

I also really like the pic as taken. It has an impressionistic feel to it. With the long exposure it might be interesting to try again with the same settings in lower light...

Thanks wkzsh54! I agree, a bit less light would have improve this. That would have made the highlights on the trunks look more interesting I think.

redcat · 11-04-2014, 05:30 PM

it looks like painting

if that's your intention then you did a great job

old4570 · 11-04-2014, 06:07 PM

I do like Aspen ...

GeoJerry · 11-04-2014, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by redcat

it looks like painting if that's your intention then you did a great job

Thanks redcoat

I had no real plan, it was an experiment, I was just curious to see what would happen. I'm wishing now that I'd tried more with this. Next year!

Originally posted by old4570

I do like Aspen ...

Me too... and thanks!

GeoJerry
	View full profile
	Contact via private message
	Find other posts by GeoJerry
	Find threads started by GeoJerry
	Find threads in which GeoJerry has posted

10-30-2014, 09:30 AM	#2
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,448	The results are entirely predictable... The base of the trunks where there is the least amount of movement are the sharpest. As you go up the tree the tree gets thinner, and the tree is going to move more. By the time you get to the top the movement of the tree may actually be measured in feet instead of inches and the movement will be extreme and cause significant motion blur, just like blurring a waterfall with a long exposure. I'm not really clear on what you were hoping for. What would a "good result" be? Last edited by normhead; 10-30-2014 at 09:37 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Intervalometer for Time Lapse?	theraven871	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	10	10-31-2014 07:12 PM
Beautiful time-lapse photography	adwb	Photographic Technique	2	05-31-2014 11:08 AM
Time Lapse K-7	SkipperRi	Video Recording and Processing	2	12-08-2013 08:51 AM
Time Lapse K5-II	DRabbit	Video Recording and Processing	3	11-19-2013 10:40 PM
Time Lapse tips	velvia	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	4	11-03-2013 09:22 PM

10-30-2014, 09:42 AM	#3
GeoJerry Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,158 Original Poster	Originally posted by normhead The results are entirely predictable... The base of the trunks where there is the least amount of movement are the sharpest. As you go up the tree the tree gets thinner, and the tree is going to move more. By the time you get to the top the movement of the tree may actually be measured in feet instead of inches and the movement will be extreme and cause significant motion blur, just like blurring a waterfall with a long exposure. I'm not really clear on what you were hoping for. Sure, of course. But wouldn't there be some distance and exposure time dependency on this effect? If I shot this picture from 200 feet away, you probably wouldn't see much movement at all except in the smaller branches and leaves. If I'd exposed for 2 secs instead of 4, maybe that would have cleaned up the trunks. If I'd used a wider angle, that could have made a difference. Or I could have waited around for the wind to die down a little. I didn't really know what to expect except the effects you noted (which is why I wanted the lower part of the trunks at center, to give some stability and hopefully focus to the image), and I hadn't tried this before. I just wondered if others had experimented with the idea and what they found.

10-30-2014, 10:18 AM	#4
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	I think it's great, a cool concept and depending on the wind speed this is probably as good as it gets. As you say, being further back could sharpen the trunks a bit, but 'pretty heavy' wind could even shift the trunk a bit with all the leaves providing resistance. I'm thinking this would be fun to try as a multiple-exposure image! Not sure that would help with the trunk though... now I need to try it thanks for the thought!

10-30-2014, 02:32 PM	#5
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,448	Here's a shot I did in a strong wind.... but at 1/320 sec. Fast enough to freeze the tree trunks but not fast enough to freeze the leaf motion,,, I really like the effect.

10-30-2014, 02:50 PM	#6
GeoJerry Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,158 Original Poster	Originally posted by normhead Here's a shot I did in a strong wind.... but at 1/320 sec. Fast enough to freeze the tree trunks but not fast enough to freeze the leaf motion,,, I really like the effect. That's a great shot, and closer to what I had in mind, although I was going for more movement and so might have wanted a shutter speed more like 1/100 or 1/50 sec, and maybe a little bit closer in. Having the hills in the distance is a great touch because it gives the picture a good stable frame of reference. The faster shutter speed adds some more range to the leaf colors instead of mushing the leaves together into one dominant tone. I'll try for something more like this next time. It would take lots of trial and error to get a good result (meaning, something I like

10-30-2014, 05:17 PM	#7
GeoJerry Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,158 Original Poster	Originally posted by jimr-pdx I think it's great, a cool concept and depending on the wind speed this is probably as good as it gets. As you say, being further back could sharpen the trunks a bit, but 'pretty heavy' wind could even shift the trunk a bit with all the leaves providing resistance. I'm thinking this would be fun to try as a multiple-exposure image! Not sure that would help with the trunk though... now I need to try it thanks for the thought! Thanks jimr, I look forward to seeing what you come up with!

10-30-2014, 05:25 PM	#8
Miguel Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Near Seattle Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,743	Originally posted by GeoJerry Not a particularly good photo, kind of murky and indistinct, but an interesting one for me. We were driving in Zion a few weeks ago in a pretty heavy wind. I stopped at this spot to try for a time lapse of these aspen trees. This is a 4 second exposure. I took a whole slew of these while my wife waited patiently in the car and this was the best I could get. I'd like to try this again and experiment more with shutter speeds and distance from subject. I tried one from about 100 yards but you could barely see the movement of the leaves from that far away. I think this one may be too close to the two trees so that the movement looks too chaotic and muddled. Not even the tree trunks look sharp. I would be interested to hear from people who have got good results from trying this. I like this shot a lot. It seems very hallucinogenic with the colorful blurred leaves. My favorite part, actually,is the perspective. The two trees bisect the space to create an entry into the scene. Well played. M

10-30-2014, 05:30 PM	#9
45 Mike Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,350	It is a rather surreal effect. I like it. I think the subject composition lends itself to the effect.

10-30-2014, 09:37 PM	#10
GeoJerry Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,158 Original Poster	Miguel, Mike, thanks for your comments! I'd really like to try this again with some faster shutter speeds and a bit more distance (or maybe wait for a lull in the wind). I only had 10-15 minutes to play with this and it was so bright I couldn't really see in detail what kind of results I was getting. Will have to wait until next year I guess.

10-30-2014, 10:30 PM	#11
wkzsh54 New Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 5	I also really like the pic as taken. It has an impressionistic feel to it. With the long exposure it might be interesting to try again with the same settings in lower light...

10-31-2014, 09:16 AM	#12
GeoJerry Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,158 Original Poster	Originally posted by wkzsh54 I also really like the pic as taken. It has an impressionistic feel to it. With the long exposure it might be interesting to try again with the same settings in lower light... Thanks wkzsh54! I agree, a bit less light would have improve this. That would have made the highlights on the trunks look more interesting I think.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-04-2014, 05:30 PM	#13
redcat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Paris Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,939	it looks like painting if that's your intention then you did a great job

11-04-2014, 06:07 PM	#14
old4570 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 2,551	I do like Aspen ...

11-04-2014, 10:06 PM	#15
GeoJerry Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,158 Original Poster	Originally posted by redcat it looks like painting if that's your intention then you did a great job Thanks redcoat I had no real plan, it was an experiment, I was just curious to see what would happen. I'm wishing now that I'd tried more with this. Next year! Originally posted by old4570 I do like Aspen ... Me too... and thanks!