Feedback, please? - DPChallenge Forums

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

10/18/2010 12:20:19 PM · #1

Only the second challenge in 187 challenges to go without a comment. However, it was my first attempt at doing night photography, so I was hoping that someone could give me some pointers on what I did wrong, what didn't work, and how I could improve. I know so little about this type of photography, feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!!

Yo_Spiff

Olympus 12-100mm f/4.0 M.Zuiko ED IS PRO

10/18/2010 12:34:30 PM · #2

I found yours to be an interesting comparison, since we placed right next to each other, with yours a couple 100ths higher. Voting breakdowns are somewhat similar. Biggest notable difference is that I got 5 comments to your 0. None of the comments I received had more than minor personal preference type criticisms, so I can't account for reasons on the 20 sub-5 votes I got. I guess I'm kind of in the same boat, as I had hoped for higher, though I suspect my anticipated critiques in my pre-challenge notes probably covers it.

I gave yours a 6. I felt was good, but it didn't wow me or have any strong appeal in other ways.

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

10/18/2010 01:00:48 PM · #3

I really didn't know where mine would fall, but the score didn't surprise me. I was just hoping people would tell me how to improve. I've never done this before, and I know it has problems, but not quite sure how to fix them. (thanks to Cory for the comment, btw!)

Steve, I'm guessing that your sub-5 scores were because people didn't necessarily see it as a fill flash shot. There were some pretty diverse ideas of what fill flash entailed.

Yo_Spiff

Olympus 12-100mm f/4.0 M.Zuiko ED IS PRO

10/18/2010 01:33:40 PM · #4

Originally posted by vawendy:

Steve, I'm guessing that your sub-5 scores were because people didn't necessarily see it as a fill flash shot. There were some pretty diverse ideas of what fill flash entailed.

And that was one of my anticipated critiques. I knew from the previous fill flash challenge that obvious usage would outperform subtlety if all other aspects were equal.

louinsd

Sony DSLR-A900

Sony 16mm f2.8 (E-mount)

10/18/2010 01:37:52 PM · #5

Hey Wendy,

My thoughts...

1. The subect isn't very captivating... He just looks like he is idly looking into a telescope. I suppose it would be difficult to look into a telescope with action, but it just didn't excite me.

2. The exposure was either too long or too short. You can see the stars starting to blur, but the blur isn't long enough to be a star trail, and is too long to be precise.

3. I love star trails and a star trail would have been really cool. just a personal preference.

4. The picture is crisp and clear. Good job. Non-grainy night time pics can be a challenge.

5. the color for the fill flash seems a little un-natural. I'm not sure how you could have helped that though.

These are just my thoughts, meant to be constructive... (I always worry when I leave critical comments)

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

10/18/2010 01:52:18 PM · #6

Originally posted by louinsd:

They were wonderfully constructive. I was definitely looking for critical comments.

I don't particularly care for star trails, so I was trying for crisp, and obviously failed at that. I'll have to try upping my ISO, like Cory suggested, to see what happens.

What I don't understand is: you seem to need a longer exposure to get the fainter stars -- the stars you don't see, but show up in the shot. But if you do the longer exposure, they get blurred. Somehow I have to figure out how to get the faint stars without blurring.

louinsd

Sony DSLR-A900

Sony 16mm f2.8 (E-mount)

10/18/2010 05:16:15 PM · #7

Originally posted by vawendy:

What I don't understand is: you seem to need a longer exposure to get the fainter stars -- the stars you don't see, but show up in the shot. But if you do the longer exposure, they get blurred. Somehow I have to figure out how to get the faint stars without blurring.

I think the darkness of the night would help... you have a city over the horizon that is adding light to the sky. If you are looking to capture the faint stars then I recommend only taking pictures when the moon is not out...

I love doing star trails, but living in soouther California I have to drive out to the desert in order to see the stars.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

10/18/2010 07:19:46 PM · #8

Originally posted by vawendy:

Yep, that's a conundrum! The general rule for maximum exposure time is 600/FL, where FL is Focal Length. This is only roughly true, of course, and is intended for rectilinear lenses, not fisheye lenses (you can go a little longer with a fisheye). So if you are using a 24mm lens, your maximum exposure time should be about 600/24 = 25 seconds. At 100% magnification, you will still see some minor trailing, but at most print sizes it will not be apparent. When using a camera with an APS-C sized sensor, use the "35mm equivalent" focal length in the calculation.
Set your ISO to 1600 or so. For this length of exposure, I'd turn long exposure noise reduction on. as

louinsd stated, part of the problem here is that light pollution is overwhelming some of the fainter stars. Up away from the horizon, however, you will be surprised at how many faint stars can be recorded, even under these conditions.
In order to achieve very long exposures without any trailing, a special tracking mount is required. It's the same type of mount used to keep a telescope aimed.

Message edited by author 2010-10-18 19:21:22.

Mike

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

10/18/2010 07:28:18 PM · #9

or you could center focus the north star and mount to a kitchen timer.

David Ey

Nikon D80

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D

10/18/2010 07:55:36 PM · #10

I put in my 2 cents.

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

10/19/2010 01:04:01 AM · #11

Originally posted by vawendy:

Two more tricks to share here:

1: use a wide angle lens, they'll show far less motion blur

2: Get a fast ass lens, 50mm f/1.0 would be ideal, but try coming as close as opportunity / budget will allow.. The 50mm f/1.8 isn't a bad choice.

Message edited by author 2010-10-19 01:08:43.