Nature Photographers Network
This is the preserved archive of the original Nature Photographers Network. The community continues at naturephotographers.network.

Highest Point In The Ozarks

Discussion

10 replies
Posted by TIMERNST on December 26, 2009 at 4:33 AM
Here is what the highest point in the Ozarks looked like early this morning (Buffalo Fire Tower, 2,561'). The forest service has recently enclosed the base of the fire tower and a new building that has been constructed within - guarded by a tall fence with the same barbed wire used in prisons, and also a motion-sensing light system. They really don't want anyone getting up there! It kind of reminded me of the movie "Ice Station Zebra" and was about as cold with gale-force winds sending the wind chill down well below zero.
Posted by Wayne Rhodus on December 26, 2009 at 7:42 AM
Sounds like they are taking the appropriate precautions. People do all sorts of crazy things when they have access to places like this.

"Ice Station Zebra" ... we may be the only two people who ever saw that movie!
Posted by TIMERNST on December 26, 2009 at 8:35 AM
I think they have beefed up the communications systems there, and is obviously something they don't want anyone to gain access to. It was abandoned as a lookout tower back in the 1970's (in favor of airplane flights), and ever since has had a radio repeater on it for forest-wide communication. Folks have climbed the tower for the view and/or for repelling off of for decades (but access to the hut on top was blocked). They removed the lower section of stairs a few years ago but anyone with a ladder could still get up, and then onto the rest of the tower. But now they constructed a new building, and then added the tall fence and special prison wire and the motion lights - which no one would ever see. So it is more than just trying to keep folks off the tower. I ended up using these lights to illuminate the tower - government-assisted lightpainting!

Here is a three-hour exposure from the other side of the tower - not a shred of noise in the file or any hot pixels. Three hours at 20mm, f8
Posted by Wayne Rhodus on December 26, 2009 at 8:44 AM
Wow, that is a clean file. I'm not a big star trail fan but I do appreciate the photographic technique required and increased capabilities of the equipment being used to capture this type of image. Really good stuff Tim. :smile:
Posted by TIMERNST on December 26, 2009 at 8:58 AM
OK, last one... ISO 6400
Posted by Scott Bean on December 26, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Nice shot! Did you use a filter to get the stars to show up as crosses? I really like that effect!
Posted by TIMERNST on December 27, 2009 at 9:28 AM
Hey Scott, yes, anytime that you see that sort of thing with a star it is either filter/software, or shot through a long telescope. Many of the big scopes have a crossbar framework for stability at the very front of the scope that will create this effect - kind of the same principle as a cross-star filter, which can be done in software - stars are typically not bright enough for an actual cross-star filter to work though, so when you see this with stars it is probably software.
Posted by Aaron Szabo on December 27, 2009 at 3:09 PM
The milky way is much more visible in the 6400 ISO shot, but the time of night may have been different. The trails look good and clean with a pretty gradient. I'm curious about long exposures when snow is on the ground. I'm sure the landscape would be completely illuminated.
Posted by TIMERNST on December 27, 2009 at 3:25 PM
Aaron, yes, the first image does not include the Milky Way so you would not see it (actually there is just a tiny bit of it on the left side) - shot at 6400 or 9000 or 12800, I forget which. My favorite of the batch is one I posted in the Journal yesterday with the Big Dipper - been trying to get a shot like that for years. A three-hour exposure at ISO 200 of the snow would probably have blown it out completely - snow reflects quite a bit of starlight. Next time we get some snow I'll run a test to see what happens.

By the way, I have not one, but two different external power sources coming this week so will get to play with an eight-hour exposure soon - no telling what that is going to do with an S sensor (I'm expecting UGLY, but hope to be surprised)...
Posted by Aaron Szabo on December 27, 2009 at 7:39 PM
Now is the time of year to do the long exposures and that camera may do pretty well with these cold temps. I need to get out for some stars soon!

That shot on the journal is nice with the dipper standing out.
Posted by Bill Dark on December 29, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Not sure which one I like best, either number 2 or number 3, I think. From the motion in the tree tops in the 3-hour exposure, I'd say the wind was very brisk. The motion also lends some additional drama, which I like. Great effort in getting out to capture these beautiful shots, I know it must have been brutal out there! I'm looking forward to seeing the 8-hour results...