Castle by night

Last night I was trying the "Starry Sky" scenery setting on my camera. It was quite a bright night whit lots of moonlight. Here is some result of it.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3406/...a2645fab_b.jpg
15sec f/2.8 ISO-100
Comments are always welcome :)

overall a pleasing pic; tho stars are not getting a look in unless its starbursts? Think I am happy with the bright lights, but would stamp out the stray blue flares and red and white post on grounds of distraction. If re-take possible perhaps a sec or two less to rein in the bright light? Are you Jack?

Hi Jeroen,

I like the composition and the colours, but as Chris suggests, a little less exposure so the buildings don't burn out would be good.

I'd also agree about the flares and post cloning in PP.

Good effort though, better than my recent attempts at night shooting.

No I'm not Jack:)
Here's my introducing post.

I agree with you that the exposure may be a little less but that isn't possible to do on my camera. I only can choose between 15, 30 and 60 sec in this mode. And of course the faster shutterspeeds for daylight.

And about the post and the blue flares. I'm new to photoshop and I don't know how to do this correctly. Does anyone heve some tips/hints/tutorials for this?

Thank you,

Jeroen

Jeroen - sorry about not having seen your name in introduction thread and so pleased to see that you are of the younger generation.

For stamping/cloning, get a new layer = command-J. Select a slightly soft-edged brush from the brushes and adjust (tool settings) to the right size. Experiment with both 'clone' and 'heal'. I never use PS(E) for this now, others will be more precise. If you don't like 1st try, just bin that layer and try again. Instructions should be in basic manual.

Equivalent to reducing exposure slightly, perhaps you have a ±EV button, try -1/3EV. If you also tell us what the camera is, someone may have it and know a better answer.

Jeroen,

If you want a shorter exposure, select 15sec and place you hand in front of the lens for, say, 5 seconds. That should stop the light getting onto the sensor. Don't think it matters whether you do this at the start or end of the exposure, but possibly easier to count slowly to 5 with your hand in front, and then remove it so the camera records the last 10 seconds.

Graham

Hi Jeroen,

I think that you did really well with what you had; obviously there are some totally blown areas with the direct lighing, but they're a lot harder to work-around than many would realise.

One "out of the box" solution for this kind of thing can be to simply arrange for someone to turn the lights on or off part way through the exposure - not always possible, but sometimes going the extra mile to setup extra things like that can make a big difference in the overall quality of the final photo. May not have been possible either, but just a thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dendrophile

Jeroen,

If you want a shorter exposure, select 15sec and place you hand in front of the lens for, say, 5 seconds. That should stop the light getting onto the sensor. Don't think it matters whether you do this at the start or end of the exposure, but possibly easier to count slowly to 5 with your hand in front, and then remove it so the camera records the last 10 seconds.

Graham

---

Now there is a simple and effective idea costing nothing. :)

In the 'olden days' photographers would use a piece of stiff card in front of the lens which could be moved to give varied exposure; and often used the 'blub' setting. A common trick with fireworks.

Thats called a grey card, isn't it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff F

In the 'olden days' photographers would use a piece of stiff card in front of the lens which could be moved to give varied exposure; and often used the 'blub' setting. A common trick with fireworks.

---

I've heard that it's particularly effective with film cameras (where long-exposure noise isn't an issue) shooting things like eclipses; the shutter is kept open for several hours and the lens is covered and uncovered at specific intervals to capture a subject in multiple positions on the same exposure.

This is probably stupid thing to recommend as I'm sure you have thought of this already or I'm missing something (other than my mind which i am already aware of). What does starry night mode give you manual doesn't? I presume in essence it's just like S mode biased toward longer exposures. If you put your camera into manual you could put the same settings from that pic in (checking exif for a "reminder" of the details if your memory is like mine ;) ). Then you could select a moderately close speed like 13sec or 10sec. Forgive me if there is no manual or I'm missing the obvious.

First of all I want to say what a wonderful community this is. To receive lots of useful tips and comments on your photo's as absolute newbie is great and helpfull.

I have a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35 . It's quite a cheap device compared to those nice SLR's but unfortunately they are a bit too expensive for a student like me :p. There isn't that much adjustable on the camera and that makes me run in to these problems. I had to use the "Starry sky" mode because that's the only way to get those very slow shutterspeeds. And when I've selected that mode, all the rest isn't adjustable anymore (ISO and EV). So there are some difficulties involved in this camera.

I thougt about using your hand to shorten the exposure time already but I guessed it might give some strange results on your actual photo on the moment that you're pulling your hand away. But that is just a matter of trying I guess.

I'll try the photoshop cloning this weekend hoping to see some nice results.

Thanks for your tips and comments,

Jeroen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JK6065

I thougt about using your hand to shorten the exposure time already but I guessed it might give some strange results on your actual photo on the moment that you're pulling your hand away. But that is just a matter of trying I guess.

Jeroen

---

I think the piece of dark card might be better than a hand. Taken away quickly it should make no difference as the 1/4 sec it takes would show virtually nothing if the correct exposure is 10sec or so.

Hi Jeroen,

I agree with Chris, if you're quick, unless there's a lot of light falling on the camera side of your hand, I doubt it'll be a problem, but dark card should guarantee a good result.
Be careful not to knock the lens though.

Good luck with take 2 and the PP this weekend.

Cheers,

A lens cap works well :)

Yesterdayevening I went back to the location to redo the photo with a shorter exposure time. I have to say the trick with the black piece of plastic I used works surprisingly well. I can set the shutterspeed reasonably precise using the countdown on my camera screen as a reference. I don't know exactly what shutterspeed I used on the photo but I thought it was about 6 seconds. the photo was taken a little earlier than the previous one so I could use a much shorter exposure time and make the building burn less.
Here's last night's shot:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3572/...e8e4989b_b.jpg
And here is that same one with some use of photoshop on it.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3646/...8a5173e7_b.jpg
I'm not totally happy with the way it turned out but it all is a matter of learning by doing it.

thanks for your help and comments are welcome