Night photo - how ?

[Dolby]

There's a house around the corner from me that decorates the entire outside with Xmas lights every year - but it seems no photo's actually do the house justice (regardless who takes them). I was wondering how one would shoot it? House is here :

http://www.looklocal.co.za/lookloca...pid=217564&The-house-of-lights-aids-charities

I guess it can't be done in a single shot and the only way is take 2+ at different shutter speeds and merge the exposures in software. Correct?

I tried that and I got the lights only http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/28435/title/lights/cat/500

But when it comes to the final one to expose the house correctly, the lights on that frame come out too bright and ruin the image entirely. If I use a shorter shutter speed to keep the lights in check, the house is too dim ...

Is there a trick?
Am I explaining correctly what I've done?
Am I on the right track at least?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Creag]

I know this place well. It's absolutely stunning. Would be good to capture the excitement and vibe of their display.

 

[Dolby]

... and the traffic!

It's unreal how many people stop!

Anyway - tried another blending (different angle) which I think was OK for hand held (last shot blurred). I know that I need a tripod, but they were out of stock of the mini tripods that I want.

http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showfull.php?photo=28437

 

[Creag]

Last year the people of the lights were giving out cupcakes. Not just any cupcakes, but the most amazing sort. My daughter was in her element.

Hopefully some of the gurus in the forum will post one or two ideas. I'd be keen to get there with my camera too.

 

[Edduck]

you can try luminosity masks and manual blending. Also shoot in RAW and if you have LR or CS, use either a high-fill + high recovery value in LR OR use the shadows & highlights tool in CS to bring out detail. HDR can also work but I would use about 5-10 exposures: fixed ISO, f9 and the vary the shutterspeed incrementaly from very dark to almost completely overexposed. Blend everything with a HDR prog (one of the opensource ones work great, can't remember the name...).

OR use those same photos and do manual luminosity mask blending. If you don't know how, look up Hougaard Malan's tutorial on his blog (posting from my phone so no links sorry, Google )

 

[d7e7r7]

It looks like you shooting when the sky is black. Best is to go earlier and shoot at twilight so the sky is still a dark blue... makes for a much better image.

Shot a house in CT the other day, will post the pics here if I remember tomorrow.

 

[Dolby]

Thanks Edduck

I'll give those a shot. I guess I need to get myself a tripod first though!

And yea - took those at night. Will try a little earlier!

 

[Dolby]

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/v38_1_05/images/a07_city_full.jpg

^^^^^ something like this wouldn't be taken in a single exposure, right?

 

[d7e7r7]

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/v38_1_05/images/a07_city_full.jpg

^^^^^ something like this wouldn't be taken in a single exposure, right?

It's very possible that was taken in a single exposure...

 

[Dolby]

Wouldn't the individual windows become one big mess of light - instead of individual windows?

 

[Quantum Theory]

I would go with d7e7r7's advice. You would have to shoot it at twilight...

This was shot at twilight:

Slightly shorter exposure would be good for your subject.

 

[Dolby]

Wow - nice!

Ok, I think I'll go a little earlier and see what happens .... I'm not sure what time they put their lights on.

Thanks for the advice!

 

[BigAl-sa]

Really tricky stuff. Best is to shoot on manual and underexpose by anything up to two stops (depending on the effect you're after). Also, if you do long exposures, keep your ISO as low as possible otherwise you are inclined to pick up a lot of sensor noise. For what you're after, trying to get a twilight exposure is excellent advice, as there will still be some ambient light.

McNaught's Comet (30s exposure f/8, ISO 200):

 

[Dolby]

Nice!

Were you waiting for the comet?
Was it that visible with the naked eye?

 

[BigAl-sa]

Nice!

Were you waiting for the comet?
Was it that visible with the naked eye?

Yip, was waiting. Only had two nights without clouds. It was pretty visible as it was a whole lot darker than the picture suggests.

You can check out these pics taken in Sudwala Caves, where I underexposed by ⅔ stop to get the lighting right (and then prolly tweaked a bit in post):
http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/Travel/Sudwala/7202335_7T9kc8#462583574_E2T43

 

[bwana]

I would also go with the twilight suggestion but can't help but wonder why you want to emphasise the house more when you're there for the lights.

Unless I'm missing something - is it perhaps a particularly splendid abode?

 

[Dolby]

The lights almost look like they're flying in the air - they're just lights on a black background.

I don't want the full house to shine up and glow - but I'd like an idea of the fact they're on a house, on the fence, around the tree etc.

 

[Dolby]

Ok - tried at twilight ... and I reckon it worked!

Also did HDR - I think my errors were aperture at 2.8 (I default on that and forgot to change it) and ISO too high. But alright, I think Also people and cars everywhere :/

Thanks for the advice!

 

[Quantum Theory]

Well done. Now go back again and shoot it at F/13 and ISO100

 

[Dolby]

LOL ... I have a stupid question about aperture which I should know by now.

I use aperture to control DoF and light - and to me this photo looks alright. How different would this same photo look at F13? I mean, at 2.8 just about everything is clear in the larger version I have?