[Theme] Multiple-exposure, image-overlay from your camera, please share yours.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Not the point I wished to show. The 'image overlay' approach can be done in the selection of the subject(s), combined in-camera, multiple exposures at the same time or on separate occasions, or done later in PS or similar. Different routes to the same end result. One cannot select a specific approach and pooh-pooh it without considering all other possibilities of getting the essentially same image and content.

A puristic or fundamentalist approach to photography only ties your hands and returns little or no rewards.

[Anthony]

I like the first two from jeoprix, and the flower woman, because in each case there is a real connection between the two images forming the composite.

I agree with Bjørn that it does not matter how the images have been combined - what matters is the artistic vision.  Also, is it necessary to limit this to Nikon cameras?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I agree with Bjørn that it does not matter how the images have been combined - what matters is the artistic vision.  Also, is it necessary to limit this to Nikon cameras?

No, not at all. Where did you get that impression? Most cameras these days allow forms of multiple exposures I think.

Feel free to contribute with examples from any brand.

[jeoprix]

No, not at all. Where did you get that impression? Most cameras these days allow forms of multiple exposures I think.

Feel free to contribute with examples from any brand.

Yes Sir, most cameras nowadays allow this multi-exposure thing.

Everyone is very welcome to post their photos taken or done from any brand.
But in my humble opinion, maybe we could off-limit those done in PS, as that will be considered more of some kind of graphics art, rather than pure photography.

[Thomas G]

Yes Sir, most cameras nowadays allow this multi-exposure thing.

Everyone is very welcome to post their photos taken or done from any brand.
But in my humble opinion, maybe we could off-limit those done in PS, as that will be considered more of some kind of graphics art, rather than pure photography.

In this case you may want to change the thread title accordingly.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I beg to disagree on that. Where in the work flow the additional image(s) enter is immaterial.  To be clear: I do prefer some kind of early stage merging, possibly in-camera, as this tends to reduce the processing workload overhead. But this is from a perspective of being short on time, not based on principle. As I already exemplified, 'layering' can be done in so many different ways and I used the various techniques a lot in my film days too. Way before anyone dreamt of PS.

We haven't even started to discuss beam splitters and mirrors. Superimposing frames is in photographic terms really old hat.

[Thomas G]

Not the point I wished to show. The 'image overlay' approach can be done in the selection of the subject(s), combined in-camera, multiple exposures at the same time or on separate occasions, or done later in PS or similar. Different routes to the same end result. One cannot select a specific approach and pooh-pooh it without considering all other possibilities of getting the essentially same image and content.
A puristic or fundamentalist approach to photography only ties your hands and returns little or no rewards.

OK. I was just curious about the technique - this is an area of photography I find very rewarding to explore.
There is a German term, 'Bildgebende Verfahren', which I find very apropriate regarding this topic.
As so often there comes a sense of technology with it while the path to aquire the desired result is entirely open.

[jeoprix]

In this case you may want to change the thread title accordingly.

Oh, yes. It should have been, "Multiple-exposure photos, please share yours.
But then, I have no idea how to change the thread title, or if it is really possible to change it.

[Anthony]

No, not at all. Where did you get that impression?

From the title of the thread.

I don't have any to contribute, yet, but it is an interesting idea and I will do some experiments.

[jeoprix]

I beg to disagree on that. Where in the work flow the additional image(s) enter is immaterial.  To be clear: I do prefer some kind of early stage merging, possibly in-camera, as this tends to reduce the processing workload overhead. But this is from a perspective of being short on time, not based on principle. As I already exemplified, 'layering' can be done in so many different ways and I used the various techniques a lot in my film days too. Way before anyone dreamt of PS.

We haven't even started to discuss beam splitters and mirrors. Superimposing frames is in photographic terms really old hat.

Point well-taken. Thank you for clarifying and taking time to at least enlighten us by your explanation.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

From the title of the thread.

I don't have any to contribute, yet, but it is an interesting idea and I will do some experiments.

I missed that thread title. I'll change it.

*Done*

[Jacques]

This is just an experiment, I have many images of the local weir, frozen water, milky water after various long exposure shots but I wanted to attempt to capture a mixture of the both, some defined details combined with a certain amount of blur in the faster flowing water, this image was achieved  using the multiple exposure and then combining into one frame option in the camera.

[jeoprix]

A fabulous image, Jacques!
I like the resulting effects, and the amount of details is extra-ordinary.
Nice try on your experiment.

[jeoprix]

Sharing another image. . .
(A silhouette shot of an engineer analyzing things on the computer, and combined in-camera with a photo of a power plant.)

[Mongo]

In the days of sandwiched slides