Moonlight in national park

[Mar]

Few days ago, friend and I went to our local NP Krka.

National park is named after the river which flows through it.
Interesting historical fact is that it was built in 1895 (moved in 1903) and as such is the second oldest hydro electric plant in the world after the power plant on Niagara falls.

Total of 28 photos will be featured on the exhibition by our photo club on March 22th, sponsored by NP itself.

This was actually shot between 22:00 and 23:30h.

[wigpro]

All I can say is WOW!! Beautiful!

Nice job...hard to believe they were taken so late in the day!

I want to go there...

Jim

[whaleshark]

These are awesome. The only telltale sign that these are long exposures at night are the star streaks in the first and last photos. And I didn't notice the first one until I looked them all over a 2nd time.

I had fair success with this moonlight photography in Joshua Tree National Park last November. Would you like to share the exposure settings, in-camera noise reduction settings and how you might have post-processed them? For in-camera noise reduction, if you used it, did the 2nd blank image take just as long as the original shutter times?

The scenes are super and so are these compositions.

[Mar]

Thanks
Dave, each photo comes with an EXIF if you wish to look into details.

Since it was at the full Moon, I used 60s exposure (didn't have the timer with me) and varying apertures, mostly around wide open.

#1,2 and 5 were shot with 14-35mm while #3 and 4 with 7-14mm.

There's a trick with 7-14mm to detach is from the body just a tiny bit so it loses the connection and that way if it's at 7-8mm it's acting as a f/2.8 lens.

All shots were in RAW and processed through Lightroom and then finished in Photoshop using Topaz plugin to add a bit of punch.

[Tony Finnerty]

These are genuinely beautiful photos, Marin. They also show that moonlight is reflected sunlight - the photos look like they were shot during the day, except for the beauty of long exposures of falling water. And the odd star in a sunny sky.

[SimonDuval]

Wow, that's simply AMAZING!!!

[whaleshark]

Thanks
Dave, each photo comes with an EXIF if you wish to look into details.

Since it was at the full Moon, I used 60s exposure (didn't have the timer with me) and varying apertures, mostly around wide open.

#1,2 and 5 were shot with 14-35mm while #3 and 4 with 7-14mm.

There's a trick with 7-14mm to detach is from the body just a tiny bit so it loses the connection and that way if it's at 7-8mm it's acting as a f/2.8 lens.
...

I don't have the program to read the EXIF. I know there are a few programs that do this. I really need to find a good one and add it.

Your exposures are very similar to what I used last November in Joshua Tree with the 7-14 mm lens. 60 seconds at f/4. I've got to take a timer so I can shoot in bulb mode next time. I need a watch I can read in the moonlight. Last time I had a digital I couldn't see in the dark.

Did you use in-camera noise reduction?

I've done that partial release with the 7-14 mm by accident. I was shooting in underwater freshwater caverns, the Cenotes in Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula, with the E-330 in an Ikelite housing and finally realized I couldn't control f-stop or focus. I couldn't open the housing to twist it on, even between dives. But the DOF is so wide at 7 mm and I was focused at infinity that it didn't matter that the camera couldn't communicate with the lens. Plus I had two big strobes set in TTL or on max flash for ample light. I got some good photos on those two dives.

[halfwright]

That is some of the finest night time photography I have seen. Truly amazing how much the cameera picks up that our eyes can't.

[MikeL]

whaleshark,

http://christian-eyrich.de/mozilla/fxif/

[MikeL]

I'm only seeing one image. And a good one it is!

[smurf69]

What more to say, damn nice.

[d4mike]

I agree, very nice, no incredibly nice! I learn more from this site than any book.

[Steven R]

Great shots!

[wclavey]

Did you use in-camera noise reduction?

I, too, am interested in this question, from the OP or from anyone else with experience in it. I did a photo workshop last year in Big Bend NP and one of the techniques we did a lot of work on was shooting the Milky Way over key geological landmarks. Most of the exposures were in the 1-2 minute range and I tried a variety of ISOs from 400-1600. I got terrible noise and banding on my E-30 raw images, and it seemed to be worse when I used the dark frame subtraction noise reduction mode. I am sure I must be doing something wrong. The Canikon crowd in the workshop got great shots by comparison.

[Mar]

I, too, am interested in this question, from the OP or from anyone else with experience in it. I did a photo workshop last year in Big Bend NP and one of the techniques we did a lot of work on was shooting the Milky Way over key geological landmarks. Most of the exposures were in the 1-2 minute range and I tried a variety of ISOs from 400-1600. I got terrible noise and banding on my E-30 raw images, and it seemed to be worse when I used the dark frame subtraction noise reduction mode. I am sure I must be doing something wrong. The Canikon crowd in the workshop got great shots by comparison.

Not sure about E-30, but on the E-5, I can shoot long exposure @ISO800 without banding.
Noise is not a problem either, you can get rid of it using RAW (no sharpening, light NR) and then use Topaz Denoise to smooth out uniform areas.

There are several factors which affect noise: temperature, humidity, light color and light sources as well as exposure.

Generally though, you're much better off shooting long exposures in clean, crisp nights.

[Annie Emm]

Wow. Wow. Wow!!! NICE!!!

[wclavey]

Not sure about E-30, but on the E-5, I can shoot long exposure @ISO800 without banding.
Noise is not a problem either, you can get rid of it using RAW (no sharpening, light NR) and then use Topaz Denoise to smooth out uniform areas.

There are several factors which affect noise: temperature, humidity, light color and light sources as well as exposure.

Generally though, you're much better off shooting long exposures in clean, crisp nights.

Thanks, Mar. I went back and looked again at your pictures... I will just sit here in awe. It will probably be a long time before I can get back out to someplace that dark to try again but when I do, I will have your shots in mind as my pre-visualization. Thanks, for sharing these.

[bikefreax]

Very nice, now it gives me something to work on.