Comparison: More Traditional Night at the Barn

[Roman Kurywczak]

I'll post this for comparison as some of you have mentioned the disconnect between the barn and the other elements in the previous barn image. As I mentioned later in the post.....I had the place to myself so I tried a few different angles.....which that one was. Having been myself there probably 100 times by now.....I do like this one better myself......often wonder if that is because of the way we are used to composing it??? Maybe the classic is a classic.....precisely because it is the best angle......some food for thought though.
Same specs....Canon 1D Mark lll with the 17-40 @ 17mm for 30 seconds and ISO 6400 at f4 tripod mounted and flashlight inside door.

[denise ippolito]

Roman, Both images are sweet! I do get the "Alone in the Wilderness" feel a bit more with this one. Beautiful composition especially with the mountain backdrop. The lights in the barn are inviting. Very nicely done.:)

[Robert Amoruso]

I am good with either one.

You have been there 100 times, me never. Want to go there with me sometime - not like a date or anything. :)

[Nick Palmieri]

I like them both as well. The stars are very nice in both of them, I tend to favor the first one only because it's less traditional. I will say that the light in the second one is very inviting (as Denise has already stated).. Outstanding job on both!

[Rene Quenneville]

Both images are beautiful. I think I like the first one before.

[Bob Miller]

Both are great! Different feels with each one! I think I prefer the first

[Roger Clark]

Roman,
Much better integration of elements. Beautiful image.

I think what people may be seeing between the two images is the size of the barn is larger in the first, and in the above it is more distant. So moving in toward the Grand Teton from your position in this photo may tip the difference of why people are saying they like the first image. I feel that too. I like the image with the barn closer too, just the integration of the elements is off for me. Here they are well placed, and making the barn closer would (obviously) change the perspective to make the barn more dominant. But don't get me wrong. I LIKE this image.

Roger

[Eric Virkler]

see below

[Eric Virkler]

Roman, I like the other image better, but not by much. This one is very good also. The parts of the other image that work better for me are the Milky Way being off to the side instead of centered as in this shot, the barn being larger in the frame, and the (non-traditional) side view of the barn, enhancing the lines of the structure.
Thanks for sharing.

Eric

Faces of Nature Photography
www.ericjvirkler.com

[Morkel Erasmus]

Roman - this one takes the cake for me...and although I appreciate you wanting a different take on the subject, Roger hit it on the head saying that the integration overall is much better here. May I ask why you resort to ISO-6400 when 2000-3200 should suffice with getting enough stars, yet render a bit less noise?

[Roman Kurywczak]

Thanks All! Didn't realize it would be a split! Morkel.....I use the higher ISO because there is a noticable difference in the amount of stars with each stop. I did a stop by stop comparison.....ISO 1600, 3200, and 6400 and when you compare the 2 images side by side.....big difference in amount of stars. I will try to play around with the ISO next time out in Decmeber......just so I can give a few comparisons.

[Morkel Erasmus]

thanks...I've found it difficult to distinguish between stars and noise at ISOs higher than 3200 :)
you can always do what I've done previously and shoot one ISO for the FG, another ISO for the sky and then blend the 2?

[Roger Clark]

Thanks All! Didn't realize it would be a split! Morkel.....I use the higher ISO because there is a noticable difference in the amount of stars with each stop. I did a stop by stop comparison.....ISO 1600, 3200, and 6400 and when you compare the 2 images side by side.....big difference in amount of stars. I will try to play around with the ISO next time out in Decmeber......just so I can give a few comparisons.

Roman,
Did you stretch each image (e.g. with curves) to bring out fainter stars at lower ISOs in your comparison?

In general, the amount of light recorded is only a function of exposure time and aperture, and not ISO. ISO only boosts post sensor gain. Higher ISOs are needed because the low end A/D converter noise dominates the low end at low ISOs. But for 1D Mark IIIs, by ISO 800 to 1600, the gain is high enough to that A/D noise is no longer dominant; sensor read noise is dominant. So, for example, at ISO 1600, you should be detecting all the faint stars you will at ISO 6400 given the same lens and exposure time. The disadvantage of the lower ISOs in the field is the LCD display is darker, but the information is there to bring out in post processing. The advantage of lower ISOs is more dynamic range, thus keeping more star colors.

Roger

[Roman Kurywczak]

Thanks for the explanation Roger! Will try it out!

[Scott Noakes]

Hi Roman,
I'm new to this forum and have just started going through the threads. I was really surprised to see all your night shots. I was in Yellowstone and Teton the same times you and Artie were there and took a lot of the same night photos, I'm surprised we never crossed paths at 3am! Your captures are fantastic, after spending many nights out doing the same I can appreciate the difficulty. What I thought was amazing were the sounds you could hear in the geyser basins. I have been there numerous times during the daylight hours and never noticed all the geysers you can hear when your the only one out there.

Scott

[Roman Kurywczak]

Hi Roman,
I'm new to this forum and have just started going through the threads. I was really surprised to see all your night shots. I was in Yellowstone and Teton the same times you and Artie were there and took a lot of the same night photos, I'm surprised we never crossed paths at 3am! Your captures are fantastic, after spending many nights out doing the same I can appreciate the difficulty. What I thought was amazing were the sounds you could hear in the geyser basins. I have been there numerous times during the daylight hours and never noticed all the geysers you can hear when your the only one out there.

Scott

Hey Scott,
I often didn't even see a car many times......whhich in all the times I've been there is ratehr rare! You are also correct about the sounds......I liken it to a baking pie when you can hear the bubbling under the crust.......with a lot of other strange coffe pot and old boiler sounds thrown in for good measure. Throw in the bugling elks......no wonder many people were afraid of it way back in the day! I rmember calling my wife and telling her I was all alone at "Old Faithful".......her reply: no way......that's when I told her it was 3am! A whole different place at night!

[Chris Ober]

Awesome shots, Roman! Can't think of anything to add other than putting my name in one of the corners :D