Posted by Russ Shugart on March 18, 2012 at 12:08 PM
After a cold night laying on the beach at twin lakes I've realized I don't have a clue as to how to get a decent starlight shot. I tried messing around with a bunch of things, ISO, apature, white balance, shutter speed, long exposure noise reduction and this was about the best I could come up with. I've seen some amazing starlight shots here but this ain't one! Anyone care to share any tips or point me to some articles that might help?
Posted by John Mumaw on March 18, 2012 at 12:46 PM
The skies looks pretty good to me, at least as far as I can judge with this small version. The thickest group center left do appear to be a bit too blue.
It's been my limited experience that a 'double exposure' blend is almost always needed to achieve a balanced (amazing?) starscape. One for the skies and one for the landscape. Then you need to darken the landscape to taste in order to avoid it looking fake. This is exactly what I did with the image that follows, although it falls far short of 'amazing'.
Floris van Breugel posted a pretty good tutorial here that may help (scroll down to 'Shooting the Twilight').
Also, Bret Edge recently posted a link on his blog for a free one hour 'webinar' on starscapes with more info. on a 4 hour video that costs $75.
Posted by John Mumaw on March 18, 2012 at 12:47 PM
My 'less than amazing' example of a starscape using blended exposure techniques.
Hi Russ, I bet we can disect this thing a little better with a larger file. Would you be willing?
Posted by Russ Shugart on March 18, 2012 at 6:15 PM
Kane, I'd love it. Any chance to learn, I'll jump at. I took a boat load of shots last night but this one seemed about the best. They're all raw nef (nikon) files with different settings etc. Should we use this one or another? How should I make it available?
Posted by Joshua Hardin on March 21, 2012 at 8:49 PM
Russ, I've largely had the same experience John described in having to use some exposure blending to get the most desired results when shooting night scenes like this. The photo you have posted here looks pretty darn good for one exposure, but often I have to take one shot for the stars, another for the mountains and combine the two to get what I'm looking for.
You can certainly post another topic with a larger .jpg at 1200 pixels at the longest side and with a 500kb max file size. (it's the choose file option at the very bottom of the "Post A Topic" page) so that we can help you out with more tips. It's also very helpful to give us the tech info for the shot you are sharing (camera body, lens, shutter speed, aperture, ISO) especially in situations like this. Thanks for posting and keep 'em coming. There are a ton of knowledgeable members here willing to help.
Hi Russ, No doubt that night photography is tricky. I'm still not very good at it. I agree with John that blending two different exposures is one way to do it. And if you know the correct workflow (which I'm unsure of) you can get some stunning results. However it’s my experience that blending night exposures is technically more difficult than your normal blend.
I think a camera’s low light ISO performance, coupled with how fast your lens goes plays a huge part in Night Landscape, especially with a single exposure. Also, critical focus can be very difficult at night. It will be up to you determine if your current camera’s ISO performance is acceptable to your taste.
Here's the basic formula you will get when researching night photography. Shoot stars at around 20 seconds or less in RAW format. Some people don't have a problem with a 30 sec star exposure, but it’s my experience ugly star trails begin to show, especially in a print 12"x18" or larger.
Basically, you need to find that mixture of higher ISO's and bigger F stops that allows enough light to gather on your sensor to show enough detail in your scene...all under 20 seconds. This is where you will have to determine if your current camera's ISO performance will satisfy your taste for minimal Noise levels. Personally, I don’t like in camera NR, and prefer photoshop NR.
So, assuming you hit critical focus; and you find that ISO/fast f stop mixture for acceptable night detail and the end result has too much noise and not enough sharpness, then shooting two/three exposures (one for foreground, one for stars) and blending will have to be the trick.
A 2.8 lens will certainly help, however forget shooting any immediate foreground that wide, and forget sharp results on the borders of the image. Opening up to F4 will help with border sharpness a lot but then you need to crank up your ISO another stop.
Lastly, the most frustrating aspect of shooting night landscape for me is Critical Focus. The standard for a single exposure is to shoot at Infinity focus. However 2 of my 3 lenses do not have "true" infinity so I have to shoot multiple exposures around infinity until I feel comfortable with my focus. I often don't know if I hit critical focus until I open them up in Photoshop.
Discussion
6 repliesThanks in advance.
Russ
http:www.AlpineGalleria.com
It's been my limited experience that a 'double exposure' blend is almost always needed to achieve a balanced (amazing?) starscape. One for the skies and one for the landscape. Then you need to darken the landscape to taste in order to avoid it looking fake. This is exactly what I did with the image that follows, although it falls far short of 'amazing'.
Floris van Breugel posted a pretty good tutorial here that may help (scroll down to 'Shooting the Twilight').
Also, Bret Edge recently posted a link on his blog for a free one hour 'webinar' on starscapes with more info. on a 4 hour video that costs $75.
Russ
http://www.AlpineGalleria.com
You can certainly post another topic with a larger .jpg at 1200 pixels at the longest side and with a 500kb max file size. (it's the choose file option at the very bottom of the "Post A Topic" page) so that we can help you out with more tips. It's also very helpful to give us the tech info for the shot you are sharing (camera body, lens, shutter speed, aperture, ISO) especially in situations like this. Thanks for posting and keep 'em coming. There are a ton of knowledgeable members here willing to help.
I think a camera’s low light ISO performance, coupled with how fast your lens goes plays a huge part in Night Landscape, especially with a single exposure. Also, critical focus can be very difficult at night. It will be up to you determine if your current camera’s ISO performance is acceptable to your taste.
Here's the basic formula you will get when researching night photography. Shoot stars at around 20 seconds or less in RAW format. Some people don't have a problem with a 30 sec star exposure, but it’s my experience ugly star trails begin to show, especially in a print 12"x18" or larger.
Basically, you need to find that mixture of higher ISO's and bigger F stops that allows enough light to gather on your sensor to show enough detail in your scene...all under 20 seconds. This is where you will have to determine if your current camera's ISO performance will satisfy your taste for minimal Noise levels. Personally, I don’t like in camera NR, and prefer photoshop NR.
So, assuming you hit critical focus; and you find that ISO/fast f stop mixture for acceptable night detail and the end result has too much noise and not enough sharpness, then shooting two/three exposures (one for foreground, one for stars) and blending will have to be the trick.
A 2.8 lens will certainly help, however forget shooting any immediate foreground that wide, and forget sharp results on the borders of the image. Opening up to F4 will help with border sharpness a lot but then you need to crank up your ISO another stop.
Lastly, the most frustrating aspect of shooting night landscape for me is Critical Focus. The standard for a single exposure is to shoot at Infinity focus. However 2 of my 3 lenses do not have "true" infinity so I have to shoot multiple exposures around infinity until I feel comfortable with my focus. I often don't know if I hit critical focus until I open them up in Photoshop.
Kane