Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Urban Life & Travel 
Thread started 20 Feb 2010 (Saturday) 12:38
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Night time, the right time...post your late hours photos here.

 
a_roadbiker
Goldmember
Avatar
1,151 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 34
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jan 03, 2011 14:21 |  #1231

i_am_hydrogen wrote in post #11514570 (external link)
Welcome to the matrix
QUOTED IMAGE

Great shot!


Click here to see a list of My Stuff

Visit my flickr (external link)
Like me on Facebook (external link)
www.jmaurophoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,643 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 131
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Jan 03, 2011 14:57 |  #1232

Here's two from last night as well.. some road shots.

IMAGE: http://lambertphotography.com/forums/2011-01-03-mtpleasant-1.jpg

IMAGE: http://lambertphotography.com/forums/2011-01-03-mtpleasant-2.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
a_roadbiker
Goldmember
Avatar
1,151 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 34
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jan 03, 2011 16:04 as a reply to  @ Todd Lambert's post |  #1233

Wow. Where do you live? The sky is fantastic!


Click here to see a list of My Stuff

Visit my flickr (external link)
Like me on Facebook (external link)
www.jmaurophoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,643 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 131
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Jan 03, 2011 17:02 |  #1234

Ha! I live in one of the most light polluted areas in the country! I have to work at getting sky shots like that, by driving hours away from the Dallas area. 8-) These were in the far upper corner of Texas where there's much less pollution.

I do use this a lot: http://www.jshine.net …tion=true&selec​ted_id=418 (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,643 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 131
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Jan 03, 2011 17:11 |  #1235

a_roadbiker wrote in post #11564612 (external link)
Shot in Heidelberg, Germany on the Neckar River...

QUOTED IMAGE

That's a tough shot.. getting the moon to show as a sliver and not a white blob. Good job!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jald3rd
Member
96 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: SoCal
     
Jan 03, 2011 22:42 as a reply to  @ post 9698970 |  #1236

Westfield, Sheperd's Bush
Canon 7D
EF-S 15-85mm
F22
30 shutters speed
ISO 400
unedited


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


7D, 5D Mk I,50mm 1.4, 100mm 2.8, 17-40mmL, 24-70mmL, 70-200 Mk IIL, 100-400mmL, 580ex II
Feedbacks:https://photography-on-the.net …=13905016&postc​ount=32353,https://photography-on-the.net …=13991453&postc​ount=32667,https://photography-on-the.net …550&posted=1#po​st13993550

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,643 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 131
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Jan 03, 2011 22:49 |  #1237

jald3rd, that's kind of an odd shot - why would you be ISO 400, but then ƒ22? I'd take this down to ISO100 and then bring the aperture to something about ƒ13 or so. I'd also set the WB to Tungsten.

At about ƒ13 or smaller, you'll start to see difraction on the 7D.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jald3rd
Member
96 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: SoCal
     
Jan 03, 2011 23:34 |  #1238

Todd Lambert wrote in post #11568756 (external link)
jald3rd, that's kind of an odd shot - why would you be ISO 400, but then ƒ22? I'd take this down to ISO100 and then bring the aperture to something about ƒ13 or so. I'd also set the WB to Tungsten.

At about ƒ13 or smaller, you'll start to see difraction on the 7D.

thanks for your comment. im a beginner, i just started playing with the traffic light trails. ill try your setting next time ;) i use f22 to get star effects on lights


7D, 5D Mk I,50mm 1.4, 100mm 2.8, 17-40mmL, 24-70mmL, 70-200 Mk IIL, 100-400mmL, 580ex II
Feedbacks:https://photography-on-the.net …=13905016&postc​ount=32353,https://photography-on-the.net …=13991453&postc​ount=32667,https://photography-on-the.net …550&posted=1#po​st13993550

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,643 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 131
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Jan 04, 2011 00:14 |  #1239

No sweat, I understand. I only mentioned it because you have one element that's letting more light in (ISO) bumped up... and then you have another element that’s letting less light in (ƒstop). You're kind of counteracting each other a bit.

You should be able to still get star effects with a larger aperture setting, and you won't be degrading the quality of your image by using such a small aperture.

Basically, in a shot like that, you're going to get the frame exposed no matter what (unless you have just ridiculous shutter speeds, etc..) so what you're really going for is determining the least amount of exposure time to get the trails that you're after. Too long, and you get the trails, but you get too much light for the rest of the frame. Too little, and your trails aren't as long as you want. Start with ISO 100 (unless you're really trying to pull in light, like stars or inside a dark barn or something) and then pick you're aperture. You'd be amazed out how sharp stuff is, no matter what the aperture is, because of the nature of long exposures.

IMAGE: http://lambertphotography.com/forums/2010-12-26-cisco-5769.jpg

Here's a shot that's actually at ƒ2.8, which you'd think would cause only the focal point to be in focus. Here, the DOF extends all the way, even at ƒ2.8. In this case, I wanted to get the cars in the left to trail all the way through the shot, so I knew I needed at least 10 seconds for the cars to enter the frame and then go over the hill and out of sight. But, because of the stars, I didn't want a shutter speed that was too long, in order for the stars to stay put and not start to move.

So, I got 14 seconds, which was enough time for the cars, with a few extra seconds to pull in the light from the stars.

Anyways, probably more than you wanted or needed to hear, but I started typing and well... ;-)a

Anyways, keep at it. Night stuff is great fun and quite a challenge.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phrasikleia
Goldmember
Avatar
1,828 posts
Likes: 14
Joined May 2008
Location: Based in California and Slovenia
     
Jan 04, 2011 02:27 |  #1240

Todd Lambert wrote in post #11569200 (external link)
Here's a shot that's actually at ƒ2.8, which you'd think would cause only the focal point to be in focus. Here, the DOF extends all the way, even at ƒ2.8, simply because of the exposure time.

Exposure time is not a factor in what determines your total depth of field. What matters are focal length, aperture, where you place the focus, and of course the size of your camera's sensor.

So, taking your shot of the rusted old car as an example: your exif says 16mm and f/2.8 on a 5D Mark II. With that combination, if you focus just 10 feet into the frame (which you probably did because that's about where the old car is), then everything from five feet in front of you to infinity would be in focus. The length of your exposure has absolutely no bearing on DoF.

http://www.dofmaster.c​om/dofjs.html (external link)


Photography by Erin Babnik (external link) | Newsletter (external link) | Photo Cascadia Team Member (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,643 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 131
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Jan 04, 2011 07:34 |  #1241

Sorry, you're absolutely right... I did not explain that very well. I didn't mean to say it affected DOF, just trying to make the point that a large aperture doesn't affect these types of shots as much as others.

Thanks for the clarification. 8-)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gcmj45acp
Member
139 posts
Joined Jul 2010
     
Jan 04, 2011 08:44 |  #1242

i_am_hydrogen wrote in post #11514570 (external link)
Welcome to the matrix
QUOTED IMAGE

Nice conversion! Isn't that one of "Niko's" hideouts in the GTA4?


Still learning, just not shooting as much as I'd like
Bodies: 7D, 5D Mark II
Lenses: 16-35L II, 24-70L, 70-200L 2.8 IS, 50 1.4
Other: GT2331 tripod, Acratech GV2 head, 580EXII, 430EXII(x4), PocketWizard TT1 transmitter and FlexTT5 transceivers along with a growing assortment of light modifiers.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LSU
Member
167 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
     
Jan 04, 2011 08:47 |  #1243

i_am_hydrogen wrote in post #11514570 (external link)
Welcome to the matrix

Without reposting the image for the third time on a page......awesome.


Canon 5D Mark III
Sigma 15mm f/2.8 EX DG Fisheye | Canon 17-40mm f/4L USM | Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM | Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM

http://blake.zenfolio.​com/portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mij
Senior Member
Avatar
503 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2006
Location: London (SW), UK
     
Jan 04, 2011 09:27 |  #1244

jald3rd wrote in post #11568711 (external link)
Westfield, Sheperd's Bush
F22
30 shutters speed
ISO 400

To me your image seems overexposed and would have been better a stop or two darker. It would add more contrast to the bikes and shopping centre, which feels lost in a flood of light, and make the great effect with the street lights pop out better.

The ISO seems to be the problem here as in the same situation I would have been looking at a similar aperture for the star effects and exposure time for the trails with a medium to low-ish level of traffic.

In general though you want to leave the ISO as low as possible at night though unless you are unable to extend shutter time or aperture as long exposures increase noise and so increasing the ISO just compounds that problem.

Todd Lambert wrote in post #11569200 (external link)
You should be able to still get star effects with a larger aperture setting, and you won't be degrading the quality of your image by using such a small aperture.

It has been a while since I have taken those kind of shots, but I found you needed f/18 to f/22 to get those really nice big star effects from street lights. Larger apertures like f/11 will still give the same effect but not to the same degree, and for me that creative decision is more important than the small loss of quality from diffraction.

Although when shooting in the city at night I prefer to bracket both exposure and shutter speeds when I can, both for blending and to create different effects, especially when there is water or motion involved, and so this gives the freedom to make such decisions on quality afterwards.

Michael.


Comments, bribes, criticism, bribes, irrelevant anecdotes, and bribes always welcome.
EXIF is available inside all my photos, though bribes are still recommended anyway.
You could visit my sparse South West 16 (external link) web site and rarely updated flickr stream (external link)...
...or you can check out my slightly more frequent London iPhone Twitter flickr (external link). Sometimes in colour!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phrasikleia
Goldmember
Avatar
1,828 posts
Likes: 14
Joined May 2008
Location: Based in California and Slovenia
     
Jan 04, 2011 09:51 |  #1245

mij wrote in post #11570749 (external link)
To me your image seems overexposed and would have been better a stop or two darker. It would add more contrast to the bikes and shopping centre, which feels lost in a flood of light, and make the great effect with the street lights pop out better.

The ISO seems to be the problem here as in the same situation I would have been looking at a similar aperture for the star effects and exposure time for the trails with a medium to low-ish level of traffic.

In general though you want to leave the ISO as low as possible at night though unless you are unable to extend shutter time or aperture as long exposures increase noise and so increasing the ISO just compounds that problem.

It has been a while since I have taken those kind of shots, but I found you needed f/18 to f/22 to get those really nice big star effects from street lights. Larger apertures like f/11 will still give the same effect but not to the same degree, and for me that creative decision is more important than the small loss of quality from diffraction.

Although when shooting in the city at night I prefer to bracket both exposure and shutter speeds when I can, both for blending and to create different effects, especially when there is water or motion involved, and so this gives the freedom to make such decisions on quality afterwards.

Michael.

I agree with all of this, though you can get away with smaller apertures than f/18. My shot above, post 1228, is f/16, though I was shooting stage lights, not street lights. I chose that aperture specifically to exaggerate the starburst effect, and it came out as emphatic as can be. I could have gone even smaller and still had very noticeable starbursts. Here's one I did at f/11, this time with street lights:

http://www.megethos.co​m …/ALBUM-GLOWING/Gallery-59 (external link)

So you don't necessarily have to be stopped down to the point of gross diffraction in order to get the effect. You can also resort to a screw-on starburst filter, of course. (I've never used one, but I've seen them employed to good effect.)

The point about ISO is a very good one. Long exposures will exacerbate the noisiness of higher ISO settings, so I only ever depart from ISO 100 as a last resort. My 5D Mark II handles noise quite well, but ISO 100 will always be better than anything higher.


Photography by Erin Babnik (external link) | Newsletter (external link) | Photo Cascadia Team Member (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,449,925 views & 6,815 likes for this thread
Night time, the right time...post your late hours photos here.
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Urban Life & Travel 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is htam
1281 guests, 245 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.