30 Seconds Too Long? Adviced Appreciated...

I took the following picture of the Christmas Tree in our Dining Room. ISO 100, f/22, 18mm (from 18-90mm lens), RAW image converted to JPEG, 30 seconds.

I haven't adjusted the image except for cropping.

Should I have left the shutter open a shorter amount of time or is this a good image that could be made very good using Elements 9?

Any advice on making this a beautiful picture would be greatly appreciated!!!

Thank you in advance.

TripleB

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

I think it looks nice. The lights are great, the image appears a bit tight and a bit busy (probably because of the tight crop.)

Here's my tree... which was shot at about 12 seconds.

OP the exposure and capture looks good.

that's impressive Todd ... we never had a tree over 7' tall for obvious reasons though one year my brother in law did whip out the chain saw in the living room on Christmas day to make the tree fit

did you guys use incandescent lights on your trees? i have led lights on mine and it definitely doesn't look as nice.
your trees are lovely! i'm jealous.

Todd Lambert wrote in post #11413601
I think it looks nice. The lights are great, the image appears a bit tight and a bit busy (probably because of the tight crop.)

Here's my tree... which was shot at about 12 seconds.

Whoa!!! Now that is what I call a tree. Sooooooooo Web Designers make good money huh!! Awesome house...I'm envious.

Looks good,
30 seconds is fine as long as there is no movement.
f/22 with a crop cam may be hurting the IQ some though.
I would try maybe f/11 and see what you think.

nice tree BTW

midnight_rider wrote in post #11413671
Looks good,
30 seconds is fine as long as there is no movement.
f/22 with a crop cam may be hurting the IQ some though.
I would try maybe f/11 and see what you think.

I agree. Generally the "sweet spot" for a lens, where it does best, is two to three stops down from wide open. Wide open, you'll get maximum "benefit" from the uncorrected aberrations left in the lens design, and stopped down to the far end, you start getting diffraction around the diaphragm, causing slight image degradation. This diffraction is less pronounced with longer focal length lenses since the aperture is physically larger even at small f-stops.

Some people swear that AWB is OK outdoors, but I ran a test indoors & have never used it since. Notice that the very last exposure in the 2nd image of tests was of a gray card, & it's way off.
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=54281

Todd Lambert wrote in post #11413601
I think it looks nice. The lights are great, the image appears a bit tight and a bit busy (probably because of the tight crop.)

Here's my tree... which was shot at about 12 seconds.

Thanks for the input....yea, the crop is a bit tight now that I look at it.

BTW: Beautiful tree and awesome house!!!

TripleB

Thanks guys/gals!

Trip, you might want to check your white balance on that as well, it's a bit warm, although, I tend to use a bit warmer color tone with these types of shots, I think your exposure looks great.

maryhee, I think we're both using incandescent lights. LED while brighter, gives off quite a blue color tone, so you may need to adjust your WB accordingly to minimize that.

Thanks for all the help, advice, and thoughts. I moved back out a little on the crop and you were right, looks better. This pic for some reason got rid of all the 'squiggly' lines seen in the original image.

TripleB

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

TripleB wrote in post #11419933
Thanks for all the help, advice, and thoughts. I moved back out a little on the crop and you were right, looks better. This pic for some reason got rid of all the 'squiggly' lines seen in the original image.

TripleB

The squiggly lines are probably hairs/dust on the sensor. They start becoming quite noticeable above f/11. Sometimes you can blow them off with a rocket blaster. Sometimes you can clean the sensor with a swab. Sometimes you get lucky like me and they find their way under the low pass filter and you get to pay Canon a couple hundred for repair.

I hate sensor dust!

Nice tree by the way. We have no tree this year...rambunctious toddler!

I would say yes...30s is too long. No need for it. f/22 results in a less than sharp image due to diffraction. Unless you're after star bursts or in daylight and want a longer exposure, then why use f/22?

aggieoutlaw wrote in post #11420098
The squiggly lines are probably hairs/dust on the sensor. They start becoming quite noticeable above f/11. Sometimes you can blow them off with a rocket blaster. Sometimes you can clean the sensor with a swab. Sometimes you get lucky like me and they find their way under the low pass filter and you get to pay Canon a couple hundred for repair.

I hate sensor dust!

Nice tree by the way. We have no tree this year...rambunctious toddler!

Strange thing about the lines is that I cropped the first pic and the second pic from the same RAW file...the top one has the 'squiggly lines', seen best on the left and right side 1/3's of the tree; and the 2nd picture doesn't...weird!

Understand about the toddler...I have a 3 year old (and 14 year old) that really loooooooved the tree last year!

Thanks for the help!!!

TripleB

Hey Todd, has that tree image been touched after the shot? It has a rather sharp look that I am after. Or perhaps I am just seeing things.

TripleB, nice edit. I like the revised version much better, it doesn't feel cramped now.

tig, that shot was PP'ed a bit, yes. Mostly some WB adjustment, sharpening, and maybe a curve or two. It's my basic PP for the most part.