Building Night Life
- Thread starter ohkphoto
- Start date
Ruidoso Bill
Senior Member
Very nice Helene, stunning shot.
Joseph Bautsch
New member
Helene, you didn't include the EXIF data. Was this a single shot with HDR applied or a three (or more) shot bracket? What were you trying to achieve with the shot? Your objective? Is the orange white balance what you intended? Tripod mounted or hand held? It dosen't look to be real sharp. A little more information please.
ohkphoto
Snow White
exif data: D2X iso 320 60mm f/2.8 from 1/10 to 0.6 sec --5 shots processed in Photomatix Pro.
The orange is actually the color of the building; however, in checking my camera settings, I realized that the WB was set to 6300 K
My objective was to get a nice shot of the oldest building in this village that showed the lighting and the front of the building nicely and without noise; I wanted some detail in the dark areas (which is why I chose HDR) and I didn't want to blow out the lights.
It was cold outside so I did not use a tripod, but used the car door window as a support, and I didn't even shut the motor off (because I wanted to run the heater! . . . sigh . . . night photography is not for wimps). I think this accounts for the lack of fine sharpness --it's not too bad in the originals , but really shows up after HDR PP.
I posted an unprocessed "original" (same exif data except shot at 1/6 sec) You can see already the noise in the dark areas. Also, I used autofocus instead of manual, and I can't find where the camera focused!
I plan to go back out tonight and try this same shot with the following adjustments:
1. smaller f-stop for more depth of field.
2. manual focus
3. tripod mount
4. use expo-disc to get a better white balance
Anything else I should do to reduce noise, get better WB and more sharpness?
The orange is actually the color of the building; however, in checking my camera settings, I realized that the WB was set to 6300 K
My objective was to get a nice shot of the oldest building in this village that showed the lighting and the front of the building nicely and without noise; I wanted some detail in the dark areas (which is why I chose HDR) and I didn't want to blow out the lights.
It was cold outside so I did not use a tripod, but used the car door window as a support, and I didn't even shut the motor off (because I wanted to run the heater! . . . sigh . . . night photography is not for wimps). I think this accounts for the lack of fine sharpness --it's not too bad in the originals , but really shows up after HDR PP.
I posted an unprocessed "original" (same exif data except shot at 1/6 sec) You can see already the noise in the dark areas. Also, I used autofocus instead of manual, and I can't find where the camera focused!
I plan to go back out tonight and try this same shot with the following adjustments:
1. smaller f-stop for more depth of field.
2. manual focus
3. tripod mount
4. use expo-disc to get a better white balance
Anything else I should do to reduce noise, get better WB and more sharpness?
ohkphoto
Snow White
Bill, thanks for the comment. I'm going to try to improve on this tonight. Thought I'd try to stick some led lights around the planters and see if that will liven it up. If you're not doing anything and would like to play at some night photography, I'll be there around 5:45. Would be happy for you to join me.
Personally, I like this shot. It's a great subject, actually, for a night shot. If there was more definition to it, I think it would look even better, but I don't quite know how one would do that. Maybe raise the ISO a tad? Perhaps it's that one bright light above that's causing the slightly fuzzy look to it. I don't quite know how to put my finger on it, know what I mean? Hey....maybe it was the slight vibration of your car as you steadied the camera on the window!
ohkphoto
Snow White
Redid the same shot tonight . . .
iso 320, 60mm focal length, f/8, 7 exp autobracketed at 1.0 from 1/8 to 8 sec.
Manual focus AND a tripod, then hdr processed in photoshop.
Am much happier with the details and very little noise . . . was able to reduce it without losing detail.
The WB bothers me . . . either didn't use the expo disc correctly, or the lighting is weird and mixed.
And Jack, you're right, that one light is irritating.
So, I learned quite a bit from this, mostly to "not be sloppy or lazy"
. . . and I believe I've seen all the beauty I can in this old building!
Comments always appreciated
iso 320, 60mm focal length, f/8, 7 exp autobracketed at 1.0 from 1/8 to 8 sec.
Manual focus AND a tripod, then hdr processed in photoshop.
Am much happier with the details and very little noise . . . was able to reduce it without losing detail.
The WB bothers me . . . either didn't use the expo disc correctly, or the lighting is weird and mixed.
And Jack, you're right, that one light is irritating.
So, I learned quite a bit from this, mostly to "not be sloppy or lazy"
. . . and I believe I've seen all the beauty I can in this old building!
Comments always appreciated
ooooh! I like this shot, Helene! Very nice! Much better than the original. Even that annoying top bright light doesn't distract. Very well done this time, Helene.
Carolina Photo Guy
Senior Member
This looks so much like an exquisite oil painting. The softness of both the light and shadow areas are, oddly enough, striking!
This shot is absolutely beautiful!
Helene, you get 2 pats on the back AND an ATTAGURL!
Pete
Joseph Bautsch
New member
Helene, oh yes a much better shot, very sharp, much better definition and details. Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. Just as you posted your list of corrections we were walking out the door and didn't get back until late. Your list was what was needed and the result was a very much improved shot. As you pointed out it's easier to do it right the first time. What I have found out from my own experience is that HDR in low light situations tends to make the final merger more intense and dramatic. As has been pointed out more like a painting. I also found out that to get a more natural look to a low light HDR use fewer shots in the merger. You can also do some post processing to the individual shots prior to merging to get different effects.
Is there another light, like a street light, off to the left of the building adding light to the shot? It looks like your WB is set more for the light coming from the lamp over the top of the building (6300K?). That other lighting is adding a blue green tint to the shot. Changing the WB in the final HDR merger in post processing sometimes dosen't have the range or effect you may be looking for. In that case change the WB in each shot or combination of shots prior to merging to get more of what you are looking for.
Just some observations from my own HDR experience. Hope it helps.
Is there another light, like a street light, off to the left of the building adding light to the shot? It looks like your WB is set more for the light coming from the lamp over the top of the building (6300K?). That other lighting is adding a blue green tint to the shot. Changing the WB in the final HDR merger in post processing sometimes dosen't have the range or effect you may be looking for. In that case change the WB in each shot or combination of shots prior to merging to get more of what you are looking for.
Just some observations from my own HDR experience. Hope it helps.
Ruidoso Bill
Senior Member
Nice shots Curt, makes me want to get my camera out at night, been a while since I did any nightime photography.
Ruidoso Bill
Senior Member
I like the light, not so much for the light but the wash down the front of the building, adds to the relief. Now I'm thinking light painting again, just need a good flashlight...
Last edited:
I have and use an ExpoDisc but find it's value limited when shooting RAW and processing in Lightroom or Photoshop. Since you created an HDR is it safe to say that you used RAW? If you did, this is one instance where I would probably take the middle image and try to post process in Capture NX2. NX2 can read the WB you set via the ExpoDisc. I keep NX2 around for two reasons: night shots like this and CA processing. I'll create a TIFF and bring back to LR to finalize.
Joseph Bautsch
New member
Eduard makes a good point. I've used white balance filters like the ExpoDisc, including ones I've made. I found they worked well in full day light but the Nikon Auto WB works just as well under those light conditions. Where I found they don't do as well is in low light or problem white light conditions. I have not experienced any problems with the post processing program, Aperture 3 or PSE 8, reading the white balance information in the RAW shots I down load to them whether from a ExpoDisc pre-set or not.
Last edited by a moderator:
Joseph, I wrote the earlier message while the coffee was brewing.
After re-reading it in the harsh light of day, what I should have said was they work as long as you remember to leave the white balance As Shot in LR or PS!