Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > How to get a night shot like this?

Reply
Thread Tools

How to get a night shot like this?

 
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-25-2005
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:57:17 -0800, "Brett" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>The photographer of this photo says the exposure was left open for 400
>seconds.
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/. Can any one
>tell if something else was done to get that type of shot?
>
>Also, how are these night shots coming out so crisp? Is this film or
>digital?
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>
>Thanks,
>Brett
>


There was some foreground lighting on the lighthouse or whatever it
is. Also, notice the spikes coming off the lights? He stopped down
his lens to a small aperture as well.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Matt Ion
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-25-2005
Jim Townsend wrote:
> Brett wrote:
>
>
>>The photographer of this photo says the exposure was left open for 400
>>seconds.
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/. Can any one
>>tell if something else was done to get that type of shot?

>
>
> Looks like a regular time exposure.. You can see the clouds have
> streaked because of the movement.
>
>
>>Also, how are these night shots coming out so crisp? Is this film or
>>digital?
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/

>
>
>
> Why shouldn't they come out crisp ? Film gives you a bit more latitude
> because it's not prone to noise.. But The new digital cameras can take
> exposures of well over 1/2 hour with no problem..
>
> Here's a shot I took last September with my 10d. It's a 27 minute exposure
> and shows the trails the stars leave as the world turns...
>
> http://www.pbase.com/jim_townsend/image/51018310


Digital also doesn't have the reciprocity failure (color shifts) common
to long exposures on film.

This one's about an 8.5 minute exposure on a Digital Rebel:
http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=1571505


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0547-4, 11/24/2005
Tested on: 11/25/2005 8:27:38 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Matt Ion
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-25-2005
Brett wrote:
> "Jim Townsend" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>Brett wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The photographer of this photo says the exposure was left open for 400
>>>seconds.
>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/. Can any
>>>one
>>>tell if something else was done to get that type of shot?

>>
>>Looks like a regular time exposure.. You can see the clouds have
>>streaked because of the movement.
>>
>>
>>>Also, how are these night shots coming out so crisp? Is this film or
>>>digital?
>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/

>>
>>
>>Why shouldn't they come out crisp ? Film gives you a bit more latitude
>>because it's not prone to noise.. But The new digital cameras can take
>>exposures of well over 1/2 hour with no problem..

>
>
> I don't know that he is using film.
>
>
>>Here's a shot I took last September with my 10d. It's a 27 minute
>>exposure
>>and shows the trails the stars leave as the world turns...
>>
>>http://www.pbase.com/jim_townsend/image/51018310
>>

>
>
> I did look at some of your photos and don't see the same crispness there.
> Why is that?


The links you posted are shot with a very wide lens (note the fisheye
distortion), and possibly a higher-quality lens, both of which would
help the sharpness. Jim's shot would also be subject to the tree moving
with even a slight breeze, whereas the lighthouse would not, and the
stars can be blurred by any clouds or pollution in the atmosphere.


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0547-4, 11/24/2005
Tested on: 11/25/2005 8:30:59 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com



 
Reply With Quote
 
Guns/Zen4
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-25-2005
Ya think?

--
Reply via the web portal at www.faczen.com or
email usenet at firstaidco dot ca

"Lukas Kovacic" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
> First of all, I think that the photographer used a tripod.


> On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:57:17 -0800, "Brett" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>The photographer of this photo says the exposure was left open for 400
>>seconds.
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/. Can any one
>>tell if something else was done to get that type of shot?



 
Reply With Quote
 
Brett
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-25-2005

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> Sorry to disagree, but when I looked at the 'fullsize' originals (which
> are still quite small), they are actually rather unsharp. The smaller
> ones are slightly oversharpened. But any decent camera with a
> reasonable time-exposure feature (say 30 seconds or more) could take a
> similar shot. I have plenty of similar shots, mainly taken around
> industrial areas on cloudy nights, or at late dusk to get a bit of
> light in the sky. Many are on 35mm film taken on old slr's, but some
> have been taken with 'prosumers', eg the Sony 717, 828 and more
> recently an Olympus C8080. Sadly I don't have any posted right now,
> but if you are totally desperate I could probably dig a couple out and
> post them.
>
>
> All you need for these shots is a tripod, a bit of patience, a suitable
> scene, and a bit of experimenting to get a feel for exposure times. An
> eye for good composition will help..


My Olympus c2100z is limited to about a 20s max exposure time. I can only
shoot JPEG and TIFF. Would RAW be needed to get that type of sharpness in
the photos I posted? I know you disagree, but to me, this seems extremely
sharp and crisp:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/. The coloring
is excellent. I'm referring mainly to the white/green marker in the
foreground. Yes, the background is not as sharp. Do you think that photo
was done in RAW?

You mentioned any decent camera could probably get the sharp photo. Here's
one I did with the Olympus:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/5021962...n/set-1438467/. Notice
how pixelated the water is. What would help? Just shooting at very high
quality TIFFs?

Thanks,
Bretts


 
Reply With Quote
 
Brett
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-25-2005

"Rich" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:57:17 -0800, "Brett" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>The photographer of this photo says the exposure was left open for 400
>>seconds.
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/. Can any one
>>tell if something else was done to get that type of shot?
>>
>>Also, how are these night shots coming out so crisp? Is this film or
>>digital?
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Brett
>>

>
> There was some foreground lighting on the lighthouse or whatever it
> is. Also, notice the spikes coming off the lights? He stopped down
> his lens to a small aperture as well.


By stopping down, you are saying he went to a higher f number (f6, f8, etc)?

Thanks,
Brett


 
Reply With Quote
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-26-2005
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 10:45:24 -0800, "Brett" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"Rich" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:57:17 -0800, "Brett" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>The photographer of this photo says the exposure was left open for 400
>>>seconds.
>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/. Can any one
>>>tell if something else was done to get that type of shot?
>>>
>>>Also, how are these night shots coming out so crisp? Is this film or
>>>digital?
>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Brett
>>>

>>
>> There was some foreground lighting on the lighthouse or whatever it
>> is. Also, notice the spikes coming off the lights? He stopped down
>> his lens to a small aperture as well.

>
>By stopping down, you are saying he went to a higher f number (f6, f8, etc)?
>
>Thanks,
>Brett
>


Yes, the spikes are caused by the small aperture and diffraction as
the light travels past where the shutter blades meet.
-Rich
 
Reply With Quote
 
Brett
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-26-2005

"Rich" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 10:45:24 -0800, "Brett" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Rich" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
>>> On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:57:17 -0800, "Brett" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>>The photographer of this photo says the exposure was left open for 400
>>>>seconds.
>>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/. Can any
>>>>one
>>>>tell if something else was done to get that type of shot?
>>>>
>>>>Also, how are these night shots coming out so crisp? Is this film or
>>>>digital?
>>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Brett
>>>>
>>>
>>> There was some foreground lighting on the lighthouse or whatever it
>>> is. Also, notice the spikes coming off the lights? He stopped down
>>> his lens to a small aperture as well.

>>
>>By stopping down, you are saying he went to a higher f number (f6, f8,
>>etc)?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Brett
>>

>
> Yes, the spikes are caused by the small aperture and diffraction as
> the light travels past where the shutter blades meet.
> -Rich


How would opening the aperature more have affected the foreground (I
understand the background will become clearer)? I suppose shutter speed
would stay constant since this is a multi minute setting for the longer
exposure.

Thanks,
Brett


 
Reply With Quote
 
Brett
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-26-2005

"Rich" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 10:45:24 -0800, "Brett" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Rich" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
>>> On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:57:17 -0800, "Brett" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>>The photographer of this photo says the exposure was left open for 400
>>>>seconds.
>>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/. Can any
>>>>one
>>>>tell if something else was done to get that type of shot?
>>>>
>>>>Also, how are these night shots coming out so crisp? Is this film or
>>>>digital?
>>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>>>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Brett
>>>>
>>>
>>> There was some foreground lighting on the lighthouse or whatever it
>>> is. Also, notice the spikes coming off the lights? He stopped down
>>> his lens to a small aperture as well.

>>
>>By stopping down, you are saying he went to a higher f number (f6, f8,
>>etc)?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Brett
>>

>
> Yes, the spikes are caused by the small aperture and diffraction as
> the light travels past where the shutter blades meet.
> -Rich


Here's another that is so clean and crisp with great colors:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/elton/6...-11947580@N00/. I'd
imagine it went from RAW to JPEG and he used a very high quality lens.
Could I be wrong on that? Again, mine are just so fuzzy and and the water
pixelated compared to that.

Thanks,
Brett


 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-26-2005
Here is a start on night shooting. Basically what you have to do is go out
and try it. With digital you don't have to have it planned out as much as
with film - just try until you get it right. There are other articles on
night shooting and a lot of night shots in the galleries too.
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/mani/t...mlongood2.html

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

"Brett" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> The photographer of this photo says the exposure was left open for 400
> seconds.
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/. Can any one
> tell if something else was done to get that type of shot?
>
> Also, how are these night shots coming out so crisp? Is this film or
> digital?
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/notrace...in/set-270103/
>
> Thanks,
> Brett
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: How include a large array? Edward A. Falk C Programming 1 04-04-2013 08:07 PM
The non-night night shot Vance Digital Photography 3 10-13-2010 01:47 AM
Shot to shot speed Tass Digital Photography 2 02-13-2006 07:52 PM
Faster SD card cuts shot-to-shot time bk Digital Photography 2 09-11-2004 04:11 AM
Sky from shot 1 with landscape from shot 2 John Russell Digital Photography 0 08-04-2003 07:08 AM



Advertisments