I took this while spending the night in incredible silence and solitude on this little pebble beach in southern Maui two weeks ago. As soon as I stumbled upon this spot I knew the potential, but having the Milky Way rise into the center of my composition right at civil twilight was an unexpected, and most welcome, surprise. I've never seen the stars like this before - even at 13,000+ feet in the Sierra, this was just incredible. I only moved one piece of coral (the white 'rocks')
Please do view the LARGER version, I find it has a more enveloping effect.
--
5D2, Nikon 14-24mm @14mm
One exposure for the landscape, ~f/18, iso 200, 30 sec
One exposure for the sea, ~f/18, iso 800, 8 sec
Three exposures for the sky, f/2.8, iso 3200, 15 sec, aligned by hand with PTGui and averaged in PS. This process helps minimize star motion and reduces noise. No luminance noise reduction, a little color noise reduction.
Comments
40 commentsPaul
Nick Bristol
Lone Rock, WI
This is a fabulous capture. I prefer just a bit brighter foreground, but that's my taste only. I do have to ask. When you say "Three exposures for the sky, f/2.8, iso 3200, 15 sec, aligned by hand with PTGui and averaged in PS. This process helps minimize star motion and reduces noise." are you shooting the same image for the sky and overlaying it, or did you do a pano of the sky for some reason? What does PTGui bring to the table in this instance if you did the alignment by hand? When you say you averaged in PS, is that just their photomerge? Thanks for any further clarification on this!
Very original with the waves below. Wonderful work.
*The sky in Hawaii (and the middle of the Caribbean on a ship) is as clear as I have ever seen. Just amazing.
Wick - I took three images of the same scene, well, except for the stars moving. Then used PTGui, which is panorama stitching software, to make a 'panorama' of those three images.. which basically meant aligning the stars properly (which is not trivial due to lens distortions). The automated algorithm as trouble with scenes like this (which is why photoshop can't do it), so I used their manual control points assistant to manually set the stitching parameters. Then I saved the aligned layers and averaged them in photoshop using smart objects stack mode mean.
Stuart - I don't find the cold white balance to fit this scene, since well, it was a warm beach and it is a warm and inviting feeling I want to convey. I find the magenta's help bring out that inviting feeling.
At first I though putting the horizon in the middle would not be good, but I think it works perfectly. The larger version definitely adds the needed detail and I finally learned how to do this kind of shots in total darkness. Thanks for the post!
Anyways, with those caveats, here is a brighter version (can't post a new larger version, unfortunately).
fantastic night scene at least you need small chair to set looking at stars with a girl friend
Nice creation Floris. Some fg water mist due to long exposure would have been icing but I don't think I could pull off something this nice.
Great job
I especially like how the Milky Way doesn't overpower the scene as so many evening images do, but instead complements the entirety.
As far as calibrated monitor. Yes, mine was calibrated for web when viewing this and it is still too dark for my taste. Maybe in a totally dark room and with a black background it would be better, but I don't think that is the average setting people will view this in. So probably two versions are helpful.
Chris
Anyhow--very nice, thanks for sharing!
I will say that I do not like how the camera renders so many friggin' stars.. you can't see that many with the naked eye, but thus far I haven't figured out how to make some of them go fade away nicely. Down sizing for web only exacerbates this problem too.
By the way, in this case the exposure difference between the foreground and sky was about 2 stops, which is about the same as most sunset/sunrise images anybody ever posts. ie. give me a clean iso 409,600 iso sensor and I could have shot this in a single exposure with minimal processing at iso 409,600, f/18, 15 seconds with a 2-stop hard GND. (that is iso 3200 +5 stops for the f/16 +2 stops for the GND: 3200*2^7 = 409,600).
aF
Yes, that's all i was saying--sorry for being confusing with 'ISO 800'--i just meant that if the only thing you changed was dropping the ISO to 800--there would be fewer stars (and less noise...) When i said i preferred the 'lighter' version, i guess i should have said 'the more contrasty' version since its really the brightness of the high-lites that i'm talking about. Would three really bright stars look better than 3,000 pale ones?? I dunno...too much for me to ponder right now
You mentioned a lot of guessing when focusing on the stars...here's a simple little trick that you may or may not know to help you nail focus the first time, if your camera has live-view that is...
First set your lens to infinity focus (this step becomes more crucial as the focal length of your lens gets shorter). Then set your camera's ISO to 1600 or 3200 and set the exposure at 30 sec. and engage live-view. Then magnify the image as much as possible and scroll around the sky until you find a bright star. Once you find a star simply turn your focusing ring and you will be able to see the changes in real-time on your live-view and therefore achieve proper focus the first time.
I always use live view to compose, and did try the method you mention, but I wasn't able to get a sufficiently bright star for it to work. That might be because when I started shooting there was still some twilight glow in the sky - the milky way wasn't even visible to the naked eye yet - so the contrast may not have been high enough to see the stars in live view.