Nighttime in the Northwoods

Hi gang,

Hoping for some c&c on the processing on these photos. I found it difficult to settle on the color balance and exposure...too bright? too dark? cool/warm/funny hue? All comments appreciated!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

I think they are nice, the colours are good, but the shots are underexposed and I see a lot of noise, also the reflection on the lake of the stars dont match!

Next time when you do a long exposure shot, set the iso at 100 and the aperture higher like f10 or so to get more detail, and have it at bulb so that you can set the time for a little longer than 30sec, you can achieve this by a remote trigger.

Thought It was hot pixels In the first shot!

holy cow there are superb...

Both nice but I think the blue splodges (reflections) at the bottom kind of spoil the first one, as the rest looks sharper. #2 I really like, although Albertonman makes some good points.

#2 is great. on #1, I would crop out a lot of the bottom.

#2 is nice. Take the cheap UV filter off your lens before retaking the first one. Those specular blue blobs are reflections off the front element that are bounced off the filter's inner surface.

joedlh wrote in post #11174236
#2 is nice. Take the cheap UV filter off your lens before retaking the first one. Those specular blue blobs are reflections off the front element that are bounced off the filter's inner surface.

Actually, the blue blobs are reflections of the brightest stars off the lake surface. They are smeared a bit due to some small wave ripples. (You can see the big dipper is upside down in the reflection. It is also visible above, but kind of gets lost in the other stars.

No cheap uv filter installed, and ISO chosen to limit exposure to 30 sec to avoid star trails.(I have a remote)

That is the type of shot that I want the 24mm L II for...

Thanks everyone for the feedback!

Stunning captures.

I like em both... however I'd clone out the stars in the first one... and I'd try bringing the shadows up a bit - not too much, just a bit to see more of the reflection in the water.

As I said, I like these, just wonder if a bit more PP would make them better?

Todd Lambert wrote in post #11175105
I like em both... however I'd clone out the stars in the first one... and I'd try bringing the shadows up a bit - not too much, just a bit to see more of the reflection in the water.

As I said, I like these, just wonder if a bit more PP would make them better?

By this, do you mean cloning out all the reflected stars on the lake surface?

Yes, I would. They are a bit distracting to me, I'd take it in the direction of more white space to let the eye rest. There's an argument that the star reflections could help bring the eye into that section of the composition, but to me, the focus is on the stars themselves and the shoreline in front of them - not the reflections. So, to accentuate that, I'd remove them. But, as with anything, salt to your own taste.

Took another shot at the processing, just playing around...did the first one as a panorama-type crop, with the horizon at the rule of thirds line, to accent the sky more:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

Nice... I like these edits and crops. Love the 2nd one.

Todd-Thanks for the detailed feedback and rationale on your thinking, by the way... very insightful!

Everyone else who commented, thank you all for your feedback as well!

This forum is awesome!