Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j65xrbm wrote

Reply to comment by that_guy_you_kno in Peaceful morning in the Alps, Switzerland [OC] [1334x2000] IG: arpandas_photography_adventure by dasarpan007

[deleted]

3

that_guy_you_kno t1_j665ixw wrote

You're either incorrect or lying to people. An exposure is a shutter cycle. If you blend multiple shutter cycles into an image it is not by definition a single exposure.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_(photography)#:~:text=An%20%22exposure%22%20is%20a%20single,of%20photographs%20in%20one%20image.

16

TrebekCorrects t1_j668ybv wrote

Yes that is, by definition, multiple exposures but at different focal planes.

5

FLATLANDRIDER t1_j66bjtd wrote

Yea this person is wrong. If you ended up with multiple files that you then stacked/blended together to make the final image, then the image is by definition a multiple exposure image.

To put it another way; the camera sensor was exposed multiple times to capture the image, hence being a multiple exposure image.

10

TrebekCorrects t1_j66ccxb wrote

When I read their initial setup, I wondered how tf they could rack focus from the plants to the mountains during a single shutter click without lens warping or any blurring.

2

eye_spi t1_j6630u8 wrote

Is this a distinction made possible by digital cameras/photography? What limited experience I have is from traditional film, and I have trouble envisioning what you say in that context.

5

FLATLANDRIDER t1_j66bmxd wrote

The sensor was exposed multiple times to take the image though. It's a multiple exposure image.

4