Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Ancient Art

  1. #1
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cody, WY
    Posts
    2,491
    Threads
    428
    Thank You Posts

    Default Ancient Art

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    I visited a local Archeological site the other night with images like this in mind. There were only 3 spots at the site where you could get enough sky in the image to make it work. I lit up the FG with a flash in manual at 1/128th power.

    Camera Model: Canon EOS 5D Mark II
    Owner: D. Robert Franz
    Date/Time: 2012:04:10 22:27:42
    Shutter speed: 25 sec
    Aperture: F 2.8
    Exposure mode: Manual
    Metering mode: Multi-segment
    Focal Length: 14mm
    ISO: 6400

  2. #2
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Southern Illinois
    Posts
    2,615
    Threads
    383
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    That artwork shows up so well. And the sky details add so much. 25 sec? A long time. Glad the stars didn't blur. Is the light area at the top of the rock from behind?

  3. #3
    Robert Amoruso
    Guest

    Default

    Nicely composed and I like the use of the flash.

    I am not a night time photography expert but I think I see color noise in the sky.

  4. #4
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cody, WY
    Posts
    2,491
    Threads
    428
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hazel Grant View Post
    25 sec? A long time. Glad the stars didn't blur. Is the light area at the top of the rock from behind?
    The wider angle you use the longer you can go withoug star motion. I've found that 400 divided by your FL in this case 14mm, gives you the length of time you can leave your shutter open... The glow is just the natural glow of the milky way!

  5. #5
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Perth Western Australia
    Posts
    2,546
    Threads
    171
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hello Robert

    Thanks for the heads up on exposure time vs Focal length. These little gems are worth their weight in gold and make this site sooooo valuable. Regarding the image, I too like the composition and the thought gone into it, but unfortunately i dont like the sky. I see greens and red tinges and the stars look square, like little bits of sugar sprinkled on a sheet. My preference would be to have the sky darker and the stars not so bright...so it looks more like what I would see outside at night with the naked eye. I guess this might be achieved with either a shorter exposure or a lower ISO, and I am curious as to which of those you would try first if you were trying to get the image i described...

    regards

    DON

  6. #6
    BPN Member Morkel Erasmus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    14,858
    Threads
    1,235
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Nice scene here Dale. Great way to show these relics...
    Not sure why you went to ISO-6400? Those I know who use the 5Dmk2 for nightscapes don't like to venture above 3200 due to noise issues. I am sure at f2.8 ISO 3200 would've given you enough 'light' as that's what I also normally use?

    Quote Originally Posted by D. Robert Franz View Post
    The wider angle you use the longer you can go withoug star motion. I've found that 400 divided by your FL in this case 14mm, gives you the length of time you can leave your shutter open... The glow is just the natural glow of the milky way!
    I've understood it to be 600/FL but my method is also to stick to 25-30 seconds for focal lengths of under 18mm.
    Morkel Erasmus

    WEBSITE


  7. #7
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cody, WY
    Posts
    2,491
    Threads
    428
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Railton View Post
    Hello Robert

    My preference would be to have the sky darker and the stars not so bright...so it looks more like what I would see outside at night with the naked eye. I guess this might be achieved with either a shorter exposure or a lower ISO, and I am curious as to which of those you would try first if you were trying to get the image i described...

    regards

    DON

    I was trying to bring out as much of the Milky Way glow as possible, in the high 5500" dry desert here in NW Wyoming thats' what we see.. So that's my vision. I've not even run any NR on this image. The RAWs look quite good! Some noise of course, it's ISO 6400. In fact I'm looking at a beautiful 17x25" print right now that looks much better than the little jpeg on the screen. Maybe some introduced jpeg artifacts when compressed...

  8. #8
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cody, WY
    Posts
    2,491
    Threads
    428
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morkel Erasmus View Post
    Nice scene here Dale. Great way to show these relics...
    Not sure why you went to ISO-6400? Those I know who use the 5Dmk2 for nightscapes don't like to venture above 3200 due to noise issues. I am sure at f2.8 ISO 3200 would've given you enough 'light' as that's what I also normally use?

    I've understood it to be 600/FL but my method is also to stick to 25-30 seconds for focal lengths of under 18mm.
    You just get a more dramatic sky at 6400 iso and that's what I'm shooting for. Belive me the 6400 print I have sitting beside me looks great. I remember back in the film days shooting on assignment with 1600 speed slide film pulshed to 3200....Now that was nasty! I've found that even with 30' at 14mm you start getting star movement when your not pointing north so I believe the equation works best at 400 divided by FL.

  9. #9
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    southeast Michigan
    Posts
    2,846
    Threads
    208
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    It sure works for me. I like the strong diagonal, the subject, and the colors. The flash nicely illuminated the rocks without casting any shadows that interfere with the image. Shooting this at night was a wonderful idea. As for the colors -- be they from noise, or not -- in the Milky Way, they very nicely complement the colors in the rocks. I wouldn't have it any other way.

  10. #10
    BPN Member Morkel Erasmus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    14,858
    Threads
    1,235
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by D. Robert Franz View Post
    You just get a more dramatic sky at 6400 iso and that's what I'm shooting for. Belive me the 6400 print I have sitting beside me looks great. I remember back in the film days shooting on assignment with 1600 speed slide film pulshed to 3200....Now that was nasty! I've found that even with 30' at 14mm you start getting star movement when your not pointing north so I believe the equation works best at 400 divided by FL.
    makes sense...great to know you can print at that high ISO at that size (I've printed ISO3200 up to A3).
    of course - I have to point south for best results
    Morkel Erasmus

    WEBSITE


  11. #11
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cody, WY
    Posts
    2,491
    Threads
    428
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morkel Erasmus View Post
    makes sense...great to know you can print at that high ISO at that size (I've printed ISO3200 up to A3).
    of course - I have to point south for best results
    Your night images are looking great as well. Going to try a bigger print as well, my buddy has the Epson 4900?? so we're going to try a 24x36"

    Now having to shoot south would be different for sure. Between that and the toilet swirling the wrong direction I'd be a mess

  12. #12
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Perth Western Australia
    Posts
    2,546
    Threads
    171
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Robert

    I envy your wide open spaces night sky...! Thanks for th explanation..

    DON

  13. #13
    Lifetime Member Rachel Hollander's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    14,320
    Threads
    929
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Dale - thanks for the interesting discussion. I like the image a lot, especially your comp and use of flash to light up the rock painting. Do you prefer flash to light painting? I'm also curious for how long your triggered the flash.

    TFS,
    Rachel

  14. #14
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cody, WY
    Posts
    2,491
    Threads
    428
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Rachel, thanks for the kind words. I set the flash at 1/128th power and just fired the flash once during the 25 second exposure. I'm quite close to the rockface so it's easy to over illuminate. I can't even imagine what the flash duration is at that power probably 1./15000 of a second. I'm still experimenting. Painting is tough, trying to get even illumination, but you have a bit more control of what you light up so I'm not sure which I like better. I've been painting with a small led light that I shine into my hand and reflect into the subject. Seems to be showing some promise.....

  15. #15
    Lifetime Member Rachel Hollander's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    14,320
    Threads
    929
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Dale - thanks for the quick reply and detailed explanation.

  16. #16
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    535
    Threads
    245
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    So, where was this when the rams were banging heads? Well done. The jpgs posted here often do little to respect what the image looks like when printed large. See you in Alaska
    Steve

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics