Here's to the night (in Atlantic Station)

[Tarzanman]

One of the results of my experiments with aperture at night.

Taken during a Friday night at Atlantic Station

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3374/3474377527_b4ef16277a_b.jpg

[ranj]

very nice! i love Atlantic station

[james]

looks like you have some dust on your lens.

[xbn83]

A lot of ghosting, flare and noise!

[punkr6]

sweet, i was there tonight...

[Nemesis]

One of the results of my experiments with aperture at night.



back to the drawing board.

[Miranda]

back to the drawing board.
I concur... Noisy and too touched up in Aperture.

[james]

I concur... Noisy and too touched up in Aperture.

you misread. i think he was playing with the actual aperture - thus giving him the "star" result from all the lights in the image.

[Miranda]

you misread. i think he was playing with the actual aperture - thus giving him the "star" result from all the lights in the image.
err... my bad...

[Tarzanman]

Lol at some of the comments.

I am curious to know what 'noise' in the photograph some of you have a problem with. I think maybe some of the know-it-alls are confusing flaring for noise.

but humor me.... tell me which portions of the photograph you find to be too 'noisy'

[Nemesis]

Lol at some of the comments.

I am curious to know what 'noise' in the photograph some of you have a problem with. I think maybe some of the know-it-alls are confusing flaring for noise.

but humor me.... tell me which portions of the photograph you find to be too 'noisy'


Go check the whoreslounge smart guy. I made a thread for you.


By the way, ill be glad to point out the noise for you when I get home.

[Tarzanman]

Keep making threads about me. Maybe I'll even get around to reading them one day.

I'm definitely interested in finding out where the noise in the photo is. I'll have to go back and check, but I think it was an f/22 shot @ ISO800.

[james]

f/22 shot @ ISO800.


on a whole boat load of cameras this setup would yield noise. i don't see much, maybe a bit on the tannish building on the top right. that may be the texture. i bet if you posted a full size image you would see noise for sure.

[.blank cd]

I can see it on the building alot, and where the light meets the black sky. You dont need to shoot a shot like this at ISO 800. Im certain you have a tripod. Try the same thing, a little bit slower, and at ISO 200 (or 100 if your camera allows) on the tripod. Your stars will be more defined too...

You got balls shooting in Atlantic Station. I damn near got arrested

[xbn83]

Lol at some of the comments.

I am curious to know what 'noise' in the photograph some of you have a problem with. I think maybe some of the know-it-alls are confusing flaring for noise.

but humor me.... tell me which portions of the photograph you find to be too 'noisy'

Lol! There is a ton of noise above the building where the dark, black area is. Couldn't you see it yourself? Everybody knows what noise is, flare is, and ghosting is. Nobody was confused!

[Brian*]

NICE!! Rep4 a nice picture!

[Brian*]

wow, someone has an attitude lol

[Tarzanman]

hotshot: You're actually the only one who called it (correctly), there is noise on the brick/stucco building sides.

The rest of you: I checked those areas on the original (meaning 100% crop) photo. The 'black sky' is quite black behind the trees and at the top of the photo (farthest away from the lights). The areas that you guys are mistaking for noise is flare from the (many) lights. If it was a bunch of noise then the entire night sky would be showing it.

hotshot: ISO 800 is perfectly usable on my camera. I didn't use something ridiculous for night shots like ISO 200 because I had the aperture closed waaaaaaaaaay down.

These were the settings:
Body: Canon Xsi
Lens: Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
Focal length: 17mm
Aperture: f/14
ISO: 800
Exposure time: 2.5 seconds

The original is slightly darker. I bumped up the exposure when converting from raw to jpg.

As for shooting at Atlantic Station... I was down the road from all the heavily patrolled stores and shops, and it was late so no one bothered me.

-EDIT-
Almost forgot.... I found a picture of Nemesis while surfing the web today, lol

http://justiceleagueunlimited.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/chappelle-player-haters-ball.jpg

[james]

hotshot: You're actually the only one who called it (correctly), there is noise on the brick/stucco building sides.

The rest of you: I checked those areas on the original (meaning 100% crop) photo. The 'black sky' is quite black behind the trees and at the top of the photo (farthest away from the lights). The areas that you guys are mistaking for noise is flare from the (many) lights. If it was a bunch of noise then the entire night sky would be showing it.

hotshot: ISO 800 is perfectly usable on my camera. I didn't use something ridiculous for night shots like ISO 200 because I had the aperture closed waaaaaaaaaay down.

These were the settings:
Body: Canon Xsi
Lens: Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
Focal length: 17mm
Aperture: f/14
ISO: 800
Exposure time: 2.5 seconds

The original is slightly darker. I bumped up the exposure when converting from raw to jpg.

As for shooting at Atlantic Station... I was down the road from all the heavily patrolled stores and shops, and it was late so no one bothered me.

-EDIT-
Almost forgot.... I found a picture of Nemesis while surfing the web today, lol

http://justiceleagueunlimited.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/chappelle-player-haters-ball.jpg

if you already have it on the tripod for 2.5 seconds, then bump down the iso to 100. that is going to give you a 20 second exposure at f/22

edit: woops thought you said f/22 not f/14.
anyways, the math is still right.

[Nemesis]

What exactly am I hating on? Just realize, you shouldnt be posting around like you're one of the so called "know it alls". Im sure itll be hard for you given your posting history.


Btw... whats your reasoning for shooting at f /14 . I highly doubt thats your lens's sweet spot.

[Nemesis]

btw take more time to PP. Youll be surprised what 60 seconds can do...

and trust me, I dont hate on anyone on here. Ive got nothing to prove.


I could have taken more time, but my point is, make sure your blacks are black, and make sure your highlights dont take away from your photo.

*takes my bandwidth and runs home*

[Tarzanman]

and trust me, I dont hate on anyone on here. Ive got nothing to prove.


....said the guy who told me he started a thread on me and subsequently 'cleaned' up my photo by making it look exactly like the original RAW exposure. Sure, nothing to prove, right.... :goodjob:
I just might believe that when you stop acting like an 11 year old girl (I used to teach 11-yr olds, so trust me when I say that).

Thanks, but no thanks for the 'help'. I'm doing just fine without your assistance.

However, if I want to read rants from someone who posts like a middle school adolescent then I'll keep you in mind.

[imbosile]

....said the guy who told me he started a thread on me and subsequently 'cleaned' up my photo by making it look exactly like the original RAW exposure. Sure, nothing to prove, right.... :goodjob:
I just might believe that when you stop acting like an 11 year old girl (I used to teach 11-yr olds, so trust me when I say that).

Thanks, but no thanks for the 'help'. I'm doing just fine without your assistance.

However, if I want to read rants from someone who posts like a middle school adolescent then I'll keep you in mind.

Man you are a moron. If you're going to say your RAW photo is so amazing, then why would you post the jpg that looks like crap?

You can't deny that his edits blow yours out of the water. Don't even try.

[Nemesis]

....said the guy who told me he started a thread on me and subsequently 'cleaned' up my photo by making it look exactly like the original RAW exposure. Sure, nothing to prove, right.... :goodjob:
I just might believe that when you stop acting like an 11 year old girl (I used to teach 11-yr olds, so trust me when I say that).

Thanks, but no thanks for the 'help'. I'm doing just fine without your assistance.

However, if I want to read rants from someone who posts like a middle school adolescent then I'll keep you in mind.



:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

[Nemesis]

Man you are a moron. If you're going to say your RAW photo is so amazing, then why would you post the jpg that looks like crap?

You can't deny that his edits blow yours out of the water. Don't even try.


I learned that I dont even have to post anything anymore. This guy proves my point everytime his fucking hands touch the keyboard.

[Tarzanman]

Man you are a moron. If you're going to say your RAW photo is so amazing, then why would you post the jpg that looks like crap?
You can't deny that his edits blow yours out of the water. Don't even try.

Other than brightening the exposure (because I like the brighter look), I didn't edit the photo. At all. There's no accounting for different tastes that different people have, but among the folks I have shown the photo to, the people who have problems with it are in the minority (and interestingly enough all happen to be on this site... coincidence ?).

Besides, Nemesis has already shown that his commentary is personal in nature. Even if I did post the ISO400 exposure at f/2.8 of the same scene that I took (which doesn't look as cool because the light sources aren't star shaped), its doubtless that he would simply find something else bad to say about it. That is what haters do, man, they hate on people. (Duh!)

Attempting to placate such a person is a waste of time. Why bother? No one has any power over you that you don't cede to them. He is the one chasing my posts around, creating hate threads and making all manner of efforts to prove that he can do more than whine. Who's given power to whom?

I'll say this, he sure must have a lot of free time.

[Nemesis]

Other than brightening the exposure (because I like the brighter look), I didn't edit the photo. At all. There's no accounting for different tastes that different people have, but among the folks I have shown the photo to, the people who have problems with it are in the minority (and interestingly enough all happen to be on this site... coincidence ?).

:blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: Hey...heres a tip...the minority probably knows what the fuck they're doing.




Besides, Nemesis has already shown that his commentary is personal in nature. Even if I did post the ISO400 exposure at f/2.8 of the same scene that I took (which doesn't look as cool because the light sources aren't star shaped), its doubtless that he would simply find something else bad to say about it. That is what haters do, man, they hate on people. (Duh!)

1. Take my comments however you want, personal or not. :)

2. If you want "cool" little stars in your photos, use a crosshatch, dumbass. And guess what.... your OP still sucks.

3. Please...tell me what Im hating on? What id be jealous of? Please , do tell me?



I'll say this, he sure must have a lot of free time.


Actually quite the contrary. :) Im just fucking l33t like that.

[james]

nobody suggested you shoot it at iso 400 @ 2.8. I think you should have shot it at iso 100 at f/22. or f/16 or f/whatever you want.....

edit:
this (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/14400-REG/Cokin_CP055_P055_Star_Effect_16.html)

[Tarzanman]

There's a lot of misunderstanding/confusion on this thread (not surprising).

As I said in the first post, the photo is one shot of 3 exposures in an experiment with low light shots at different apertures to see how the results affected the final image and exposure. I let the camera meter everything else (except for ISO, which I changed between 400 and 800).

Of the 3 photos, I choose my favorite, and brightened it and posted it. A lot of people have said that they like the photo, and a few have said that they (apparently) don't like it. Strangely enough, of these two groups of people, the people who say that they don't like the photo have given it 3x more attention than everyone else. :-)

Nemesis (who seems to have an angry-man crush on me) posted an 'edit' which is almost identical to my un-brightened RAW exposure. I am still trying to figure out why he bothered since he dislikes the photo so much (FYI: he is also certainly not a hater and doesn't have anything to prove!)

No doubt all this lends truth the altrusm that "Haters want to hate and lovers want to love". :-)

[Nemesis]

(FYI: he is also certainly not a hater and doesn't have anything to prove!)


Smartest thing youve said your entire time on this forum.