Posted by Paul Wegemann on February 1, 2012 at 9:24 AM
This image started off as just an experiment to see how many different pieces of a large area I could light, and I figured I'd wind up deleting my shots afterward, but as the evening went on, I realized I liked what I was seeing. For scale, the tree is about 60 feet from the camera position. This is from the South St. Vrain canyon, a few miles from my house. I'd love to hear any comments, critiques, or thoughts that folks might have.
Thanks,
Paul
Update: I should have mentioned that this is not one image. I lit and photographed individual areas of the scene, then blended them in PS. It's really easy to do.
Posted by Todd Caudle on February 1, 2012 at 9:33 AM
You certainly got an audible "Oh wow!" from me! The dimensionality you've achieved with this technique is astounding! All I can say is, think of the possibilities.
Any chance you'd share your settings and lighting times?
Posted by Paul Wegemann on February 1, 2012 at 11:02 AM
I'd be happy to share my settings, Todd. I'm at work right now, so I'll respond after I get home.
Posted by John Mumaw on February 1, 2012 at 11:44 AM
Very, very impressive, Paul! No nits from me at all. The lit tree is quite appealing. I doubt this would have worked as well (if at all) under daylight conditions.
I wondered how you achieved this so near-perfect. Great idea, and I also look forward to reading your technique.
Posted by Morris McClung on February 1, 2012 at 12:31 PM
Paul, this is just done so well! Very unique and interesting, and I am excited for you and for the journey you are on right now.
Posted by Pam Colander on February 1, 2012 at 1:59 PM
Very VERY appealing Paul! Anxiously awaiting your technique.
Posted by Paul Wegemann on February 1, 2012 at 10:44 PM
Sorry for this long wordy post, but some of you asked about the technique. I wasn't sure how detailed to get, so this is just the
basics.
If you've never tried this before, what I'm writing may sound some somewhat cryptic, but once you dip your toes in the water, it
will make sense.
First off, plan on shooting a large image in small pieces. You could shoot the image all at once, but that would be much more
work and if you make a mistake you’ll cry because you invested so much time. And, image quality could suffer as your exposures could wind up being really long, .
In the case of my image above, all the component images were shot between ISO 200 and 400, f16, and exposure times varied between 13 and 30 seconds, although the rock face on the far back right was 2 minutes, shooting on Bulb.
I auto-focused using a flashlight, then switched to manual. Of course, I used a tripod.
For lighting I used a small handheld led flashlight and a 160 led battery operated panel (cheap on ebay). Each has a snoot made from tape or cardboard. The snoot keeps light from going everywhere and helps mitigate light streaks when you point the light toward the camera. If you're careful, you can avoid light streaks altogether.
For lighting technique, I back lit, side lit, top lit, or bottom lit everything except for the rock formation behind and to the
right of the tree. I avoid front lighting as that obscures texture and makes things look really flat. To start with, I walked into
the scene, near the small alcove, pointed the light at the ground at about 45 degrees, toward the camera, then starting painting
the foreground while exposing on bulb. I ran back and forth to the camera, to get my exposure somewhat dialed in, then
I exposed a dozen frames, varying what I was exposing and for how long. Then I simply walked or climbed around in the scene, skimming the light obliquely across surfaces. In some cases, I was inches away from the subject (using the small light), and in some cases, a few feet (using the larger light). The only areas I couldn't get close to were the tops of the tree, the top of the biggest rock on the left, and the cliffs on the upper right. By lighting in small sections, I didn't have to worry too much about light
streaks that can occur from shining the flashlight at the camera, or accidentally lighting myself. If they do occur, those issues can be dealt with very easily later in PS. Wearing dark clothes can help.
It's not such a big deal with small subjects, but with a subject this size, I found that having a wireless remote trigger was
indispensible (again, cheap on ebay). I was able to keep shooting without having to constantly run back and forth to the camera(except for getting the initial exposure dialed in). If you had a partner, this wouldn't be an issue.
Mistakes are inevitable and I'm learning more from them than from my successes. Even if only a small part of the image comes out well, it's a success as you can easily use that piece later in post processing.
Post processing is pretty easy. In Photoshop, stack the images you want into layers, then change the blend mode of all but the
bottom layer to lighten or screen. If you plan ahead on the positioning of your lighting and avoid light streaks, you can
literally come up with a complete image in under a minute, even with lots of layers. If you did wind up with light streaks, or lit
something you didn't mean to, like yourself, a little masking makes quick work of things. Perhaps the hardest part of post
processing is deciding which parts of which images to use.
If anyone has questions, just ask. This is a deep rabbit hole, and I'm happy to share what I've learned so far. Like it or not,
you'll really come to understand the inverse square law, something we landscape photographers can generally ignore.
One thing that's become very clear to me is that this technique is really landscape painting; the flashlight is your brush and the light is your paint. If you've got any experience at all in drawing or painting, you might find this comes naturally to you.
For more info, I've found the work of the following light painters to be incredibly helpful and inspirational.
Posted by Pam Colander on February 1, 2012 at 11:51 PM
This is great! Thanks a lot Paul
Posted by Paul Wegemann on February 2, 2012 at 11:15 AM
You're welcome, Pam. I look forward to seeing some of your light painting!
Posted by Jeff Hackett on February 2, 2012 at 12:33 PM
Your experiment definitely paid off! Amazing image!
Posted by Dan Gerth on February 2, 2012 at 5:33 PM
Wow, that is really great! I love the 3D feeling and how the variations in lighting lead your eye around.
I've just started playing with this, found some information at http://www.daveblackphotography.com/workshop-at-the-ranch that got me going. He's got about a half dozen tutorials going from tabletop still-lifes to landscapes, including light source recommendations.
This has really inspired me!
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on February 2, 2012 at 8:11 PM
Thanks for taking the time to share the details, Paul. I love the 3D lighting that you achieved.
Posted by Paul Wegemann on February 2, 2012 at 8:35 PM
Thanks for the comments everyone. Dan G. (Thanks Dan!) reminded me of the work of another photographer whose work really inspires me; Dave Black
Posted by Art Escobado on February 2, 2012 at 11:57 PM
Paul your image feels very well crafted. The shared links really set my imagination wild. Thanks so much!!
Discussion
17 repliesThanks,
Paul
Update: I should have mentioned that this is not one image. I lit and photographed individual areas of the scene, then blended them in PS. It's really easy to do.
Any chance you'd share your settings and lighting times?
I wondered how you achieved this so near-perfect. Great idea, and I also look forward to reading your technique.
basics.
If you've never tried this before, what I'm writing may sound some somewhat cryptic, but once you dip your toes in the water, it
will make sense.
First off, plan on shooting a large image in small pieces. You could shoot the image all at once, but that would be much more
work and if you make a mistake you’ll cry because you invested so much time. And, image quality could suffer as your exposures could wind up being really long, .
In the case of my image above, all the component images were shot between ISO 200 and 400, f16, and exposure times varied between 13 and 30 seconds, although the rock face on the far back right was 2 minutes, shooting on Bulb.
I auto-focused using a flashlight, then switched to manual. Of course, I used a tripod.
For lighting I used a small handheld led flashlight and a 160 led battery operated panel (cheap on ebay). Each has a snoot made from tape or cardboard. The snoot keeps light from going everywhere and helps mitigate light streaks when you point the light toward the camera. If you're careful, you can avoid light streaks altogether.
For lighting technique, I back lit, side lit, top lit, or bottom lit everything except for the rock formation behind and to the
right of the tree. I avoid front lighting as that obscures texture and makes things look really flat. To start with, I walked into
the scene, near the small alcove, pointed the light at the ground at about 45 degrees, toward the camera, then starting painting
the foreground while exposing on bulb. I ran back and forth to the camera, to get my exposure somewhat dialed in, then
I exposed a dozen frames, varying what I was exposing and for how long. Then I simply walked or climbed around in the scene, skimming the light obliquely across surfaces. In some cases, I was inches away from the subject (using the small light), and in some cases, a few feet (using the larger light). The only areas I couldn't get close to were the tops of the tree, the top of the biggest rock on the left, and the cliffs on the upper right. By lighting in small sections, I didn't have to worry too much about light
streaks that can occur from shining the flashlight at the camera, or accidentally lighting myself. If they do occur, those issues can be dealt with very easily later in PS. Wearing dark clothes can help.
It's not such a big deal with small subjects, but with a subject this size, I found that having a wireless remote trigger was
indispensible (again, cheap on ebay). I was able to keep shooting without having to constantly run back and forth to the camera(except for getting the initial exposure dialed in). If you had a partner, this wouldn't be an issue.
Mistakes are inevitable and I'm learning more from them than from my successes. Even if only a small part of the image comes out well, it's a success as you can easily use that piece later in post processing.
Post processing is pretty easy. In Photoshop, stack the images you want into layers, then change the blend mode of all but the
bottom layer to lighten or screen. If you plan ahead on the positioning of your lighting and avoid light streaks, you can
literally come up with a complete image in under a minute, even with lots of layers. If you did wind up with light streaks, or lit
something you didn't mean to, like yourself, a little masking makes quick work of things. Perhaps the hardest part of post
processing is deciding which parts of which images to use.
If anyone has questions, just ask. This is a deep rabbit hole, and I'm happy to share what I've learned so far. Like it or not,
you'll really come to understand the inverse square law, something we landscape photographers can generally ignore.
One thing that's become very clear to me is that this technique is really landscape painting; the flashlight is your brush and the light is your paint. If you've got any experience at all in drawing or painting, you might find this comes naturally to you.
For more info, I've found the work of the following light painters to be incredibly helpful and inspirational.
Harold Ross
Eric Curry
Brent Pearson
I've just started playing with this, found some information at http://www.daveblackphotography.com/workshop-at-the-ranch that got me going. He's got about a half dozen tutorials going from tabletop still-lifes to landscapes, including light source recommendations.
This has really inspired me!
Dave Black
All your hard work really paid off here.