|
This could be a trap, the first one to call this photo busy will have to explain what happened to all the workers. View it large if you're a techno-freak like me. I love the detail Moritz and you have to tell me how the stars are produced.
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Nikke, thanx for the nice comment. I'm glad you like this picture. To answer your question: I don't know why the stars are so dominant. They are a result of the diffraction of the light, that occurs often on such dark pictures when using a high f-stop (f/11 in this case). I find the stars a little bit annoying.
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I think this is lovely too, but the subject is a little lost in the frame. The expanse to the left of the ship is a bit too empty, and the foreground crane cover the ship a bit too much. If you can't reshoot a crop would improve it. If you can resshot get a bit closer, to the right and let us see more of the ship.
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Hey, yes, I was not sure how to take this picture. I didn't want to cut off the cranes, and I tried to get most of the ship on the pic. However, ty trying that most of the picture is dark. Would you crop only to the illuminated part?
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
It's hard to believe those stars occurred naturally! I wouldn't crop anything, I think this gives an impression of this oasis of light and activity in an otherwise dark and deserted world, I particularly like the cranes outline disappearing into the darkness. Pretty crisp for a 13 second exposure, must have been a tripod with very little wind? Nice Shot.
I only found out where the name came from when I looked at the largest version!!
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
This would have been a prime candidate for bracketed exposures. As posted, the darkness on the left makes the photo feel unbalanced.
If you had another, brighter shot, exposed for that part of the ship then you could blend exposures for a more balanced feeling composition.
Otherwise, I'm quite partial to these industrial shots but I've often found them difficult to frame due to limited shooting angles and the shear scale of the subjects.
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Harry, I've used a relatively light Manfrotto 190PROB tripod. Glad you like the picture.
Craig, you're right about the bracketed exposures. I've tried that the whole evening, and got sick of it when I was shooting this picture (unfortunately). But on the other hand, I'm not very experienced in DRI, so I tried to find the best "single" exposure for this scenery.
Thanx for your comments.
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
You have to view this large to truly appreciate how wonderfully sharp it is, especially for a night scene. A tribute to the D70s, its lens, and not least of all, the photographer. Makes me wish I had a dSLR. Good work!
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
O/T
I keep thinking of a dSLR but favour the Canon 350 or 300!! as I already have some lenses that will apparently work!
But then I keep looking at the new non SLR panasonic 12x optical 8.3mp because of the ease of use! and the inbuilt stabiliser, wonder if there are any experts in the group who can advise? (Sorry moritz for hijacking your excellent picture thread!)
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Harry, well... maybe you won't get the answers you were looking for in this thread, so probably you have to ask the question in other groups. I made the transition to DSLR about 3/4 year ago and did not regret it. The Oly C-8080, that I've had before, was very easy to use and my first pictures with the Nikon were disappointing, but the more pictures I took the better they were. I took this picture together with friends, both have a Canon 350D. I haven't looked at their pictures yet, but maybe I can post their results here.
Mike: thanx for this nice comment! Honestly this picture was quite easy to take: Put the camera on a tripod, use a remote release and push the button ;-) But I have to agree about the sharpness of this picture, especially when considering this is the "kit-lens".
Originally posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
Moritz Petersen edited this topic 78 months ago.
|
|
|
Even kit-lenses have their sharp moments, apparently!
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Uh. Wrong. Sorry. That was not the kit lens, but the cheapo 70-210mm f/4-5.6 AF-Nikkor. This is taken with the kit lens:
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
OK. Back to the star question then - in this other photo they don't come out as crisp as your post-photo. Could be due to the quality of the lense but the stars are there alright.
My wild guess is that it's the CCD that makes the stars. Have any of you analogue (I once was one too) photographers seen this in your long-time exposures?
Forgive me for talking only about the stars but my first guess was that you were referring to sunflowers (the lamps) with your title (before I saw the large version) and I don't think they are a distraction. I believe they help the image catch the eye.
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Well, I don't think that the CCD theory is correct, as I have taken both pictures with the same camera. The difference must be in the lenses. I have taken another picture of the harbour a while ago (look at the beautiful blue sky!)
This picture is taken with the 85mm f/1.8. I am not sure if my theory about diffraction effects on the aperture diaphragm blades is correct, because I don't see a coherence in the lens construction to the star effect:
18-70mm: rounded blades - no stars
85mm: rounded blades - stars
70-210mm: not known, but probably straight blades - stars
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
moritz is right, the star effect is caused by diffraction as the light bends around the aperture blades and has nothing to do with whether a camera is film or digital.
When you stop down, the effect increases. Opening the aperture lessens the effect. The shape and quality of star will be determined by the number and shape of the aperture blades in that particular lens.
Check out this interesting discussion on the photo.net forums.
Originally posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
hodge (a group admin) edited this topic 78 months ago.
|
|
|
BTW, moritz, that third photo is my favourite of the 3 you posted. Lovely light and colours and it's incredibly sharp.
I've heard good things about the 85mm f1.8 and it looks as if they're true.
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Hodge, thanx for your comments. The 85mm f/1.8 is the best lens in my equipment. It is incredibly sharp and has very nice colors. However, it is at the same time the most inflexible lens for a DSLR with 1.5x crop. The subject must really fit in the field of view, which is not very often the case. With this focal length, "zooming with my feet" is not always possible.
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
re the "stars"
I counted 14 points on all the stars so this probably came from the fact that the 70-210 f/4-5.6 D is a straight seven-bladed aperture. When you stop down an aperture point sources of lights get stars due to diffraction. If the aperture is straight-bladed, instead of curved those stars will be more pronounced. The F.T. of a polygon is a star pattern with the number of points = the number of sides if even or twice the number of sides if odd.
Some manufacturers, like Nikon, prefer odd numbers of blades for this reason.
I hope this helps.
Originally posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
tychay edited this topic 78 months ago.
|
|
if i was not drunk tychay wouldn't have just given me a headache.
love all 3 shots
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
@Jon: Sorry. Basically if you have a seven bladed diaphragm you get a 14-pointed star. If you have a six bladed aperture you get a 6-pointed star.
People see this less because newer lenses have 9-bladed diaphragms and those blades are curved. moritz™’s lens is older and has a diaphragm made of seven straight blades.
Posted 78 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I have gotten this effect with the D70 kit lens.
www.flickr.com/photos/anole/103312286/
My friend, shooting alongside me with the 70-210mm, also got the effect:
www.flickr.com/photos/gradyb/103324529/
Posted 76 months ago.
(permalink)
|
Would you like to comment?
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).
|
C.A.F.E. /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to C.A.F.E. discussion threads
