Christmas lights

[WesternGuy]

There are some neat light displays on our street, and elsewhere in the City. I searched the forum, but could not find anything on how one might photograph them with a Canon Digital Rebel, e.g. Exposures times, ISO setting, etc. Anyone have any experience with this type of photography? If so, any insight that can be provided will be greatly appreciated. :thumbsup:

Thanks.

WesternGuy

[Photo-John]

The nice thing about digital is the instant feedback. Shoot a test, see if you like it, and then fine-tune it! The first rule of night shooting is use a tripod. If you aren't sure where to start for an exposure, just use an auto mode and let the camera make the decision. Check the settings, switch it to manual and start making your own decisions based on what the camera did and your evaluation of the test shot. I recommend always using the lowest possible ISO for the best image quality. And if you're using a tripod, camera shake won't be a problem.

Here are a couple of how-to's on the site that will give you some more ideas and insight:

Basic Photography Exposure Guide >>
Fireworks Photography Guide >>

Experiment a lot and have fun - it's digital - there's no film to waste!

[Medley]

It all depends on what kind of editing software you have. I use a Rebel XT and Photoshop CS2. If I were to do this, I'd take two exposures: one metered to the lights and one to the background. The I'd combine the two in CS2 with the "blend if" command.
You still want to use that tripod, to get both exposures exactly the same. In fact, I agree with everything Photo John said, with the possible exception of the ISO setting. You can get the image quality back if you know your way around the LAB color space. Still, if you can get the shot without raising the ISO, you're better off.

-Joe U.

[freygr]

With my Olympus C 3030 the exposure was something like ISO 800 at 30 seconds, When I get my home computer fixed I will look it up and post the settings the camera used, along with the picture.

[WesternGuy]

Guys, thanks for the advice and insight. John, thanks also for the how-to's. I will give it a shot in the next little while and maybe post some here if I can figure out how to do that. (I know the instructions are here some where) :thumbsup:

Cheers,

WesternGuy

[Photo-John]

You can get the image quality back if you know your way around the LAB color space. Still, if you can get the shot without raising the ISO, you're better off.

You use the luminosity channel in the LAB color space to minimize noise, right? But wouldn't the quality be even better if you shot at low ISO? I mean, increasing the ISO is using gain to amplify data, correct? You can't get back the small details you lose because the "grain" is larger. Plus, why use a high ISO if you don't have to?

I am curious about what you'd do to improve the image quality in the LAB colorspace. I know it's doable and I've seen it done. But I don't remember how. I also have noise reduction software. Is it any different from using noise reduction software to decrease noise?

Thanks-

[Skyman]

night stuff is one of my personal favourites, and christmas brings so many great night time opportunities. I have a photo (I can't post as my scanner died) that is a 4 min exposure of a house covered in lights. the yard was full of people but they all kept moving so you can't tell in the shot. the lowest iso is best. shoot in raw or if you are shooting in jpg decrease the contrast and increase the saturation. manually calculate your exposures for high iso then readjust them for lower iso and add a bit of time (to compensate for the reciprocity index law failure!) then do a test shot. if your exposure is say 2 minutes (assuming you use bulb mode) and something you don't want in the shot comes into frame cover then lens with a cap or something then resume your exposure after it has passed all i gotta do is find time to get out and do some this year! oh and as others have said a good tripod is a must as is a cable release. some photography books have exposure charts you can use as a guide to help you calculate roughly where your exposure should be.

[another view]

Exposure depends on the light level - 30 sec at ISO800 sounds like a lot of exposure from the few times I've done it but what I've shot may be different. And maybe the results I've been looking for have been different as well. This is an important concept...

I agree about the instant feedback of digital here. Use the histogram to make sure you're getting the results you want. I'd expect to see most of the graph on the left side (shadow or dark side) because it's night.

Unlike my usual advice, I'd probably start in an automatic mode with evaluative/matrix metering and take the shot the camera thinks is right first. Adjust from there... As often as I praise the spot meter, it isn't the right tool for this job.

[Medley]

You use the luminosity channel in the LAB color space to minimize noise, right? But wouldn't the quality be even better if you shot at low ISO? I mean, increasing the ISO is using gain to amplify data, correct? You can't get back the small details you lose because the "grain" is larger. Plus, why use a high ISO if you don't have to?

I am curious about what you'd do to improve the image quality in the LAB colorspace. I know it's doable and I've seen it done. But I don't remember how. I also have noise reduction software. Is it any different from using noise reduction software to decrease noise?

Thanks-

The channel used to reduce noise depends on the type of noise. Color noise, by far the more frequent, shows up in the a and b channels. You can blur the snot out of these channels without affecting quality because all the detail is in the Lightness channel. Surface Blur is the tool of choice if you're using CS2, Gaussian Blur works almost as well if you're not. You may get a bit of a tonal shift in the color, as you're mixing the color from the noise with the "pure" color, but unless you have an incredibly large amount of noise, you probably won't notice the shift. Even if you do, it can be compensated by a curves adjustment on the individual channels.

Monochromatic noise is more bothersome, as it shows up in the L channel. As I said, this is the channel with all the detail, so a simple blur would essentially destroy the Image. Your best choices here are the Dust and Scratches filter, the spot healing brush, or the clone tool. A retouching technique called "duplicate and float" works well too, though must be done in the layers pallette, not on a channel.

Duplicate and Float in a nutshell: Duplicate the layer. Use the move tool to move the topmost layer 2 pixels up and 2 pixels right (use the arrow keys to move the layer one pixel at a time). Set the blend mode of the top layer to "lighten". Add a layer mask and fill it with black. Now zoom in on the image. Using a small, soft-edged white brush at 100% opacity and working on the layer mask, dab at the dark spots. The lighter color from the offset layer show through, eliminating the dark spot. Duplicate the background layer again and offset this one 2 pixels down and left. Set the blend mode to "darken", set up your layer mask, and do the light spots. This technique is great for eliminating the minute noise without driving yourself crazy with the clone tool.

Is it easier to lower the ISO? Absolutely, if you don't mind limiting your creative options. If you can get the exact same shot with a lower ISO setting, then you should by all means use the lower setting. But if you need to capture a moving object in low light, wouldn't it be better to up the ISO and use a faster shutter speed?

My understanding of ISO setting in a the digital realm is that increasing the ISO increases the camera sensor's sensitivity to light. So it would seem to me that upping the ISO will cause a loss of information in the darkest areas of the image (the shadows) and record more information in the highlights. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this, but experimentation seems to bear that out.

Thank you John, for your input on this. I think our differences are more a matter of perspective than philosophy. The image-editing side I know. The photography side I'm still learning.

Oh, about the noise reduction software. When I find one that's as particular about the subject as I am, I'll get it a whirl.

-Joe U.

[espressotalk]

Hi

I will be doing the same in the near future. The lens you use will be important. If you have a lens with IS you will have an easier time in any shooting mode because of less camera shake.

But assuming you will be using a standard lens here is what I would try

If you are shooting in Tv mode use a faster shutter speed at a higher iso 400-800

If you are shooting in Av mode shoot at the largest apature your lens allows and keep the iso at least 400.

Auto mode will use the flash and may give you harsh images with deep shadows.

I would shoot in RAW+JPEG in any case, you never know what images can be saved.

Your camera also offers bracketing mode, where your camera will shoot 3 consecutive images in three different exposures. Then you can choose your best shot.

[another view]

Auto mode will use the flash and may give you harsh images with deep shadows.

Good point, make sure if you're following my advice that you disable the flash. On-camera flash will look terrible with this.

IS lenses are nice, but I'd guess that most of your exposures will be long enough that IS won't be able to help as much as it would be needed. A good sturdy tripod can handle any shutter speed - well, assuming no subject movement but this is true of IS as well. If nothing is moving, and/or you want some areas blurred like car's tail lights then a tripod, low ISO setting and a tripod will make a lot of sense. That and the histogram.

[Loupey]

Here's an example of one I did a few years back. Originally taken in JPEG (not recommended) and editted with PS 5.0 (not recommended) so only basic PP was done.

I don't have the original file so I'm not sure of the camera settings. But like those ahead of me have already stated, I just winged it until I got what I liked. But if I did it again, I'd probably start at around 15 seconds, f/11, ISO 200.

Why 15 seconds? From about 4 seconds and longer, just about any tripod can hold a camera steady (unless a truck drives by).

Why f/11? A smaller aperture will produce a "natural" starlight effect.

Why ISO 200? I still have an old Canon 10D and I can't stand anything above ISO 200

Hope that helps!

[WesternGuy]

Thanks Loupey. Picture is great and I will take note of the exposure, etc.

WesternGuy

[readingr]

Why use such high ISO - I always use 50 if there is no movement so that there is no chance of noise and use longer times for the photo.

It depends on the amount of lighting in the photo. A house in Basingstoke which I took a few years ago came out well on ISO 100 film on an old Panasonic compact because they had so many lights - so 1/50th 1/60th say.

On others 15secs plus has been used.

One thing that did cause me trouble was where Santa or Snowman moves so you have to time the exposure to snap before it changes or it causes a blur in that part of the photo.

Must try some with the Powershot Pro and see how they come out.

Roger

[PhotoGirl]

great question/thread, WesternGuy; i'm learning a lot!

Loupey, amazing photograph!!:thumbsup:

[another view]

Why use such high ISO - I always use 50 if there is no movement so that there is no chance of noise and use longer times for the photo.

Good point - only problem being any movement of the tree from even a little bit of wind. Generally it's best to use the lowest ISO speed you can get away with.

[WesternGuy]

Thanks PhotoGirl. Unfortunately, it has been extremely cold here up until a few days before Christmas (and then company came) and I do mean ccccold... -25C to -35C at night and up to (if we are lucky) -18 to -20C in the daytime. The nightime temps are just a bit too cold for yours truly to be running around taking light pictures. You are right though, we and hopefully others, are learning a lot.

Cheers and a Happy New Year (to all)

WesternGuy