Early Wake up Call!

[ShaneS]

You are right Grahame and thank you for confirming my view on this one. I was really trying to learn a bit of PP based on your edit so I can apply it in future. Just playing with soft light and multiply layers was a helpful exercise - it really is quite amazing what either can do to the colors/contrast in an image. I thank you so very much for taking the time to help me...maybe after a few (hundred) more tries I will capture one as nice as your recent efforts

Funny that the first shot really stumped me but at least the second shot has some potential to build on so all was not lost. In fact, looking at the second image again almost all of the adjustments were done in ACR with very slight tweaks in Photoshop. So maybe it was just the scene as you said.

The other thing that this exercise taught me that it is amazing how much light the camera picks up! The first exposure was so bright even though it was still barely light that it confused my brain in terms of how to PP How do you deal with that?

As far as where the sun was, you are correct I was pretty much aimed into the sunrise and I thought that would give a cool silhouette to the island. I will try with the sun at more of a diagonal next time to see how that works.

Thanks again!

[Colin Southern]

The settings: f8 30 seconds ISO 100 shot at 32mm about 20 minutes before the sun came up (no filter)

I also had trouble activating the bulb mode in the dark and even though when I clicked 'auto' in ACR the program deemed the exposure to be correct. I suspect I should have used a longer exposure but I'm not sure how that would have impacted the sky given that I have no ND filter.

Hi Shane,

If you want to use a longer exposure then "something has to give" to compensate. In this case - since you shot at F8 - you could have stopped down more; ie 1 minute @ F11, 2 minutes at F16, 4 minutes at F22 etc. Also - if you want longer and you don't have an ND filter handy - then just keep shooting whatever you're shooting and combine them when you get back home; 8x 30 second shots will look the same at 1x 4 minute shot.

In terms of the image - as I see it anyway - you're getting there, but the biggest issue with that shot is that it's so wide there's no detail; this is a common mistake people make with wide angle lenses. A couple of "food for thoughts" ...

If you're going to use a wide-angle lens then push in aggressively to something in the foreground, like this ...



Often though, more pleasing shots can be accomplished more easily by using a long focal length and "zooming in" to just a portion of the scene in front of you, eg ...

[Stagecoach]

Hi Shane,

I suspect the reality may have been closer to the below as it was taken 20 minutes before sunrise



Grahame

[ShaneS]

LOL Grahame...pretty spot on with that image of reality

Thank you for the examples and advice Colin - this was my first serious attempt at this type of shot and I hope to get out and try again this weekend.

[ShaneS]

Just so you folks don't think I have seriously lost it....

Here is the actual sunrise from the day. I like this shot and think the composition is pretty good (see foreground interest Colin ) though not exceptional. I did not present it previously as this shot was not my goal for the day. However, it does show where the sun was in relation to the island in the first shot. Big "duh!" as I already know that things tend to look better side lit ala Grahame's point about 90 degrees.

[Stagecoach]

Hi Shane,

I looked at a shot I took exactly 5 minutes before the driftwood tree ones as I was waiting for more light. This was exactly 90 degrees to the left of the tree/island shooting right at where the sun would come up.

It clearly shows that the good light does not have to be at an angle to what you are shooting. Almost nothing done in PP other than reduce the yellow highlight and output sharpen globally for web.

Not good as a composition but a great example of early morning light and reflection on water.

6s, f/11


Grahame

[bnnrcn]

Lovely image Shane. I would crop half of the rocks at the FG to put the emphasis on the sun rise. I think Colin's advice is right spot on. No more scenes with full of empty water

[Colin Southern]

Just so you folks don't think I have seriously lost it....

Here is the actual sunrise from the day. I like this shot and think the composition is pretty good (see foreground interest Colin ) though not exceptional. I did not present it previously as this shot was not my goal for the day. However, it does show where the sun was in relation to the island in the first shot. Big "duh!" as I already know that things tend to look better side lit ala Grahame's point about 90 degrees.

Good stuff. You'll need to work out whether a vertical or horizontal orientation looks better for shots like this though; more often than not I'll think you'll find horizontal wins out - especially if you have strong horizontal lines in the shot (like horizons).

For what it's worth, I made an image similar to yours a few years ago; looking back, it's only strength was the transitioning sky colour. I still like it but I have to admit that feedback wasn't great and I think it only sold one or two 22 x 44" canvases:



If I were there, I'd probably get a horizontal version of the same scene - Looooong exposure - and repeat ad-nausium from first light (well before sunrise) until after the sun comes up - then see what I had. Did that essentially with this shot ...



(Which would have been a "meh" shot without the foreground)

[bnnrcn]

Thanks for the very useful explanations Colin. I learn a lot from you

[bnnrcn]

Colin, may I ask if you focus stacked the image which was taken with the long lens? I'm asking because I don't understand how you got the full sharpness by shooting so close to the stones with a long lens

Hi Shane,

If you want to use a longer exposure then "something has to give" to compensate. In this case - since you shot at F8 - you could have stopped down more; ie 1 minute @ F11, 2 minutes at F16, 4 minutes at F22 etc. Also - if you want longer and you don't have an ND filter handy - then just keep shooting whatever you're shooting and combine them when you get back home; 8x 30 second shots will look the same at 1x 4 minute shot.

In terms of the image - as I see it anyway - you're getting there, but the biggest issue with that shot is that it's so wide there's no detail; this is a common mistake people make with wide angle lenses. A couple of "food for thoughts" ...

If you're going to use a wide-angle lens then push in aggressively to something in the foreground, like this ...



Often though, more pleasing shots can be accomplished more easily by using a long focal length and "zooming in" to just a portion of the scene in front of you, eg ...

[Colin Southern]

Hi Shane,

I looked at a shot I took exactly 5 minutes before the driftwood tree ones as I was waiting for more light. This was exactly 90 degrees to the left of the tree/island shooting right at where the sun would come up.

It clearly shows that the good light does not have to be at an angle to what you are shooting. Almost nothing done in PP other than reduce the yellow highlight and output sharpen globally for web.

Not good as a composition but a great example of early morning light and reflection on water.

6s, f/11


Grahame

Grahame,

On a side note, my encouragement with shots like this is "don't be afraid to think outside the box a bit too" - with a longer focal length (or even a short one) and an agressively low camera elevation, those sand ripples could be part of a killer composition.

If you haven't got a gravel rash on your tummy then you ain't shooting low enough!

[Colin Southern]

Colin, may I ask if you focus stacked the image which was taken with the long lens? I'm asking because I don't understand how you got the full sharpness by shooting so close to the stones with a long lens

Nope - no focus stacking required (it's not a technique I normally need to use).

It was shot at F22 - and the DoF from the hyperfocal point is more than adequate at that aperture.

[Donald]

If you haven't got a gravel rash on your tummy then you ain't shooting low enough!

I'd go with that one, although in my case it's usually mud! But the Angle Finder makes life a bit easier. Sometimes it's just the knees that slowly sink in the mud as the final composition takes place.

[Stagecoach]

I'd go with that one, although in my case it's usually mud! But the Angle Finder makes life a bit easier. Sometimes it's just the knees that slowly sink in the mud as the final composition takes place.

Fully agree and I found the angle finder invaluable shooting that tree with the camera about as low as I could get with my tripod set-up.

[bnnrcn]

I see Colin, thanks. I thought you shot with a lens longer than 50 mm, but obviously it is shorter

Nope - no focus stacking required (it's not a technique I normally need to use).

It was shot at F22 - and the DoF from the hyperfocal point is more than adequate at that aperture.

[Colin Southern]

I'd go with that one, although in my case it's usually mud! But the Angle Finder makes life a bit easier. Sometimes it's just the knees that slowly sink in the mud as the final composition takes place.

For sure. And I hope people don't think we're kidding - I'm deadly serious. I've had my CF tripod in salt water so often the retaining nuts at the end of the tubes (inside) are pretty corroded.

[Donald]

For sure. And I hope people don't think we're kidding - I'm deadly serious.

Indeed. I have two pairs of trousers/pants that are an essential part of my photography gear. I'm not allowed to wear them anywhere else because the mud is ingrained into the fabric. So my 'photography trousers' are as imporatnt as the tripod, angle finder, etc.

[Colin Southern]

Indeed. I have two pairs of trousers/pants that are an essential part of my photography gear. I'm not allowed to wear them anywhere else because the mud is ingrained into the fabric. So my 'photography trousers' are as imporatnt as the tripod, angle finder, etc.

What - no kilt on those occasions?

[Donald]

What - no kilt on those occasions?

Can get a bit chilly around the Dardinelles!

In fact a kilt is an incredibly warm garment. With all the pleating in it, my kilt is made up of 8 yards (7.3m) of material. It's a heavy thing to carry around your waist.

[Colin Southern]

Can get a bit chilly around the Dardinelles!

In fact a kilt is an incredibly warm garment. With all the pleating in it, my kilt is made up of 8 yards (7.3m) of material. It's a heavy thing to carry around your waist.

Ha - 7.3m sounds close to the circumference of my waist!