That tree, some moonlight and a flash

[Stagecoach]

Some will know of my obsession with the tree in this image from various previous postings and it continues.

Last night gave the opportunity to attempt capturing it illuminated from behind by the moonlight and test out a plan I had to light it with one single SB600 flash. It was not my intention to include the moon as I have done this before but to use the light from the moon to enable capturing the sky and water.

Generally all went to plan, no wind, tide almost as I wanted it and low humidity. I only wish it was physically possible to get a lower shooting angle.

So here's a few I have worked on and as usual I can not make my mind up about colours and crops

Taken with D800, Tamron 28-75mm and this wonderful new contraption I'm in love with called a ball head

No 1 - 30s, f/8, ISO100, 75mm


No 2 - 25s, f/8, ISO100, 75mm


No 3 - 25s, f/8, ISO100, 75mm


Comments and suggestions are welcome as always.

Grahame

[Shadowman]

Nice series, I think the subtle light on the water of the first works best.

[deetheturk]

All nice Grahame, but at a push it's no.2 for me mate, well done!

Cheers David

[Rebel]

I really like #1 Grahame, but the leaves on the tree are a little too bright for me. (Although I am viewing on a 13inch Macbook screen.)

In #2 the moonlit water just doesn't look natural for me.

And #3 has a blue colour cast and the sky is a bit too busy.

Hope that helps

Edit: Saying that, I do like the sky tone in #2... sorry to confuse.

[Geoff F]

Yes, #3 is slightly overdone for my tastes. Probably #1 looks the most natural.

[Ziggy]

First time I have seen "The Tree", very cool.

[Manfred M]

Grahame - of the three, I also prefer the first one and would agree with the assessments.

Are you taking a single shot or are you "painting with light"?

If you combined the first image (where I find the leaves a bit dark) with leaves of image 3, you might get a stronger composition.

[Stagecoach]

Nice series, I think the subtle light on the water of the first works best.

Thanks John, the change in light reflection on the water over the short period was very much determined by the cloud formations and I found quite interesting. I'll agree No 1 has my preference in that area.

[Stagecoach]

All nice Grahame, but at a push it's no.2 for me mate, well done!

Cheers David

No 2 was one of my rare shots taken in portrait orientation David, glad you like it. A practice found far more easier now with the ballhead when working low.

Cheers, Grahame.

[Stagecoach]

I really like #1 Grahame, but the leaves on the tree are a little too bright for me. (Although I am viewing on a 13inch Macbook screen.)

In #2 the moonlit water just doesn't look natural for me.

And #3 has a blue colour cast and the sky is a bit too busy.

Hope that helps

Edit: Saying that, I do like the sky tone in #2... sorry to confuse.

Thanks for the comprehensive assessment Matt, it certainly helps my confused mind. No 2 is interesting with that reflection, it almost looks added in post.

[Stagecoach]

Probably #1 looks the most natural.

An interesting comment Geoff.

It was not my intention to make the scene look natural. The 'natural' result would have been the tree being in total silhouette barely visible against the background and without the unnatural smoothing of the water.

The purpose of the exercise was to produce a pleasing image, but I have to say I'm still totally confused as to how unnatural you can get away with

[Stagecoach]

First time I have seen "The Tree", very cool.

Thanks Jim, it lives fairly close to me and is a regular subject that I shoot in as many ways as I can think of when conditions are right and I just want to play

[Stagecoach]

Grahame - of the three, I also prefer the first one and would agree with the assessments.

I agree Manfred

Are you taking a single shot or are you "painting with light"?

I'm taking a single long exposure and during this time holding the flash aimed at the tree and can manage 6 fires at full power in the exposure durations of these. I was quite surprised thankfully that the flash seemed to have little impact on the water exposure.

If you combined the first image (where I find the leaves a bit dark) with leaves of image 3, you might get a stronger composition.

Agree. For info the leaves in No 3 were enhanced in ACR by using the selection brush on them to increase 'exposure' and in addition I increased the 'green' luminance. I was pleasantly surprised that this did not 'overrun' into the sky.

[Manfred M]

An interesting comment Geoff.

It was not my intention to make the scene look natural. The 'natural' result would have been the tree being in total silhouette barely visible against the background and without the unnatural smoothing of the water.

The purpose of the exercise was to produce a pleasing image, but I have to say I'm still totally confused as to how unnatural you can get away with

Grahame - one "trick" I use is to play with saturation in PP. I find that this will often lead me to a solution where I can balance the strange colours with something that is more pleasing. Turning down the saturation level will often cover for all sorts of sins....

[Manfred M]

I'm taking a single long exposure and during this time holding the flash aimed at the tree and can manage 6 fires at full power in the exposure durations of these. I was quite surprised thankfully that the flash seemed to have little impact on the water exposure.

So you are light painting. I thought as much looking at the images, but wasn't quite sure. You might want to try other light sources over and above your flash to direct light as specific parts of the tree. You'll have to shoot in "bulb" mode to keep the shutter open using a wired remote. I've played with this technique a bit and might try it again when it gets dark out earlier in the night.

[IzzieK]

Good experiment, Grahame...even if I am partial to blue. I like #1 best, followed by #2. #2 is bit more unique in the bluish tone but my natural looking eyes favours #1. Now I am confusing myself. I should be in bed I think....

[rachel]

Nº 1 may look the most natural, but I love the moonlight on the water in 2 and especially 3.

[Stagecoach]

Grahame - one "trick" I use is to play with saturation in PP. I find that this will often lead me to a solution where I can balance the strange colours with something that is more pleasing. Turning down the saturation level will often cover for all sorts of sins....

Thanks for this tip Manfred, as I work more and more now with ACR I'm finding more tricks I can use before finishing off in PS.

[John 2]

The first one for me although I think the leaves might benefit from a bit more "life". The green responds to a small amount of saturation but you would need to mask off the trunk. There is a bit of reflected green light there that doesn't need to be enhanced. I love the simplicity of the composition and the thought of the moonlight behind, sets a nice mood. Could be a hanger.

[Stagecoach]

So you are light painting. I thought as much looking at the images, but wasn't quite sure. You might want to try other light sources over and above your flash to direct light as specific parts of the tree. You'll have to shoot in "bulb" mode to keep the shutter open using a wired remote. I've played with this technique a bit and might try it again when it gets dark out earlier in the night.

Not sure if I would term this one 'light painting' as I did not use the flash in a controlled direction to light different parts of the tree as you would do with a smaller light source such as a torch. I did consciously set the flash to its narrowest angle of 85 deg based upon 75mm lens and the tree being 20 metres from me, a guess that worked

Painting with a torch is certainly a possibility and something I have not tried before. Taking this scene as an example it appears the significant areas of comment/concern by viewers is the sky and the water reflections. The brightness of the tree is mentioned but something which is relatively easy to adjust/change in post so overall I see the tree as the easiest component to deal with.

What would be interesting to know is how much torchlight is required to achieve equivalent illumination that I can get with the flash in the exposure time needed for the water/sky in this image. This then raises the question of exposure times used as longer exposure times sometimes do not work well with certain cloud formations and direction also smoothing the water too much.

I have some great palms at 20 metres from a balcony here so tomorrow, weather permitting, I'll take some 25 second exposures at night using both flash and continuous torch to get some comparison.

Fortunately my remotes, wireless and cable that I used with the D300 work with the D800 so 'bulb is no problem