Long Exposure Landscapes - Inspired By Eddie Gaz

[68lbs]

Decided to give the ultra-long exposure thing a go last night. Goddammit, you don't get many shots when each one takes 10 minutes! In reality, exposures ranged from a couple of minutes upwards, and it wasn't until I got home and viewed them on screen that it became apparent 10 minute exposures were what was really need. And I'd only done one that long. Also tried to do a little light painting with the flash whilst there. Never tried this before either and wasn't sure what I was doing, so just pointed the flash and fired it at various bits that I thought might benefit from more light.

Anyways... these are the results. None of this exposure blending nonsense Just single exposure shots of my local landscape

Please leave HONEST CRIT. It doesn't need to be in depth or anything, but please don't say they're great if they're really a pile of carp!

1. 10 minute exposure

2. 7 minute exposure (my fave)

 

[squidgeyem]

Wow loving no 2 well done

 

[PD_BARBS]

Excellent shots, well captured. Love the effect the long exposure has on the sky

 

[Janice]

The second one is great... the rock looks like it has moonlight on it. Whatever you did with the flash it worked!

 

[Tim Sainsbury]

They're great...!

Number 2 is my favourite sky, the rest of image is just uninteresting (sorry!). The rock majig I think needs to be closer and I dont like the groin (?) blocking my view to the horizon. Still, great exposure work, I'm just being honest and picky, the lighting is very nice and 'authentic'.

Number 1 has more potential IMHO, its just lacking something in the foreground, I like everything else and the way the sky leads you to the city lights..

 

[68lbs]

Wow loving no 2 well done

Excellent shots, well captured. Love the effect the long exposure has on the sky

Thanks Squidgey and PD... the second is most definitely my fave, for the sky and lighting on the foreground rock.

the rock looks like it has moonlight on it. Whatever you did with the flash it worked!

I hadn't thought of it like that. The moon was over the opposite side, but we won't tell anyone

Number 2 is my favourite sky, the rest of image is just uninteresting (sorry!). The rock majig I think needs to be closer and I dont like the groin (?) blocking my view to the horizon.

I agree with you regarding the horizon being blocked, now that you've pointed it out. I have a habbit of doing this, and must remember to pay more attention. I think the rock and 'pool' works well though.

And just for future reference it's groyne. Groin is, erm, well... you're crotch as far as I'm aware. And I don't mean one of those walking aids for people with broken legs.

 

[Puz]

Number 2 is the best of the bunch here. Very striking and the rock looks like it was kinda of shot in a studio with the background superimposed. As for the background I'd clone out the star trail by the sign and the halo bottom left leaving the trail at the top. Just my thoughts though

 

[EdinburghGary]

I'm Flattered

Awesome, awesome, awesome fun, is it not? The 2nd is a peach!

 

[Tim Sainsbury]

And just for future reference it's groyne. Groin is, erm, well... you're crotch as far as I'm aware. And I don't mean one of those walking aids for people with broken legs.

Oh yes, ha..errmm. :bonk: I'll consult a dictionary next time.

 

[Yv]

#1 - I like for its implicity, my only crit is the two flared lights far right, they distract and and too far right to be complimentary to the image. If they were mine I would either crop them off, or retake either with a wider angle or rotate camera slightly so they are an integral part of the picture.

#2 - gorgeous, not totally sure about the white lines rnnig across the clouds [aircraft lights?] but still a fabulous long exposure shot.

 

[EdinburghGary]

#1 - I like for its implicity, my only crit is the two flared lights far right, they distract and and too far right to be complimentary to the image. If they were mine I would either crop them off, or retake either with a wider angle or rotate camera slightly so they are an integral part of the picture.

#2 - gorgeous, not totally sure about the white lines rnnig across the clouds [aircraft lights?] but still a fabulous long exposure shot.

I suspect the lights are stars, as when I get aircraft lights, they are normally far stronger and have a slight wobble.

 

[Foggy]

Strange isnt it how taste differs. For me number 1 is a clear winner, love it.

Not so keen on number 2, the rock looks a bit wierd and just keeps pulling my eye away from the rest of the photo.

 

[Yv]

I suspect the lights are stars, as when I get aircraft lights, they are normally far stronger and have a slight wobble.

You are probably right, I was looking at the length of them for a 7 min exposure... my 25 min exposures got not much longer than those...but then aircraft would be much longer I suppose... :shrug: Must be those angles

 

[animal168]

good stuff i like the second one of the two although its hard to choose.
I had a go at this last night as well. I will post the results tonight. I hope they are as good as these.

 

[The Lorne Ranger]

They're great!

Number 2 is the best.

I will have to get myself a shutter release cable & give it a try!!

Great Stuff!!

 

[DonnaM]

Terrific shots. I think I would crop the two bright lights on the right in #1 but #2 is just b****y awesome.

 

[Simmotino]

Number two is a corker (really like the sepective lighting on the rock).

The only thing that detracts for me is the flare from a light source on the left of the horizin just creeping in to shot. Without the actual light source in the image it looks a little out of place.

 

[Toothie]

number 2 i really like and can't fault.

number 1 is good but the light on the RHS either needs to be cropped out or brought into the pic more, where it is is just distracting. the starbursts are great thought so i see why you included them i just think there location in the image is wrong.

 

[rookies]

Where about these were taken as lovely place to take photos there for long exposure as I have tried it a few times but FAILED

 

[dcash29]

Honestly....I like them especially the skies.

Shot one i would have liked to see more of the lights (left).

And finally on both pictures i'd crop the bottom off nearly to the lights and gorynes

Dave

 

[rookies]

Dont think I would crop anything of either of them then the rules of 3rd be messed up they both appears with the rules of 3rd to my eyes

 

[68lbs]

Wow, so many comments. I'll post a detailed reply to everything that's been talked about tonite when I get home from work. I'm just really pleased that something I've taken has provoked this much discussion and comment.

 

[devitt]

The 2nd works well for me too 68lbs. I like the lighting in the foreground especially. The only thing that I am not as keen on is the odd star trails here and there, only works for me when there are lots about.

 

[chewyuk]

Number 2 by far and away is the better image, although one slight comment is that if you were using some flash light, I may have considered used some of the wood to bring just a little of the detail out. The first doesn't work for me but only becasue of the town lights than aren't sparkling. Play some more !!

 

[dcash29]

Dont think I would crop anything of either of them then the rules of 3rd be messed up they both appears with the rules of 3rd to my eyes

Guess its down to personal tastes. The sand is boring to me and cropped makes the pictures more dramatic focusing your eye on the subject and sky in my opinion.

I'd rather have a better picture than a crap rule of thirds

Dave

 

[Matt Sayle]

These are great. The second one is awseome and I think the first needs something closer in the foreground and the right hand starburst to be fully in the frame.

Did you shoot these in bulb mode? Any advice please.

 

[rookies]

These are great. The second one is awseome and I think the first needs something closer in the foreground and the right hand starburst to be fully in the frame.

Did you shoot these in bulb mode? Any advice please.

Yup should think he shoot them in Bulb Mode to get that very lone exposure

 

[68lbs]

I'd clone out the star trail by the sign

That sounds like a good suggestion to me

I'm Flattered

You should be. It's your long exposure shots that made me think it might be worthwhile.

my only crit is the two flared lights far right, they distract and and too far right to be complimentary to the image.

the light on the RHS either needs to be cropped out or brought into the pic more, where it is is just distracting. the starbursts are great thought so i see why you included them

I know what you both mean. As Ruth said, I included them because I liked the star effect.

gorgeous, not totally sure about the white lines rnnig across the clouds [aircraft lights?]

Star trails, as already mentioned

Strange isnt it how taste differs.

Yes. And as someone who wants to produce images that give others pleasure when looking at them, it is something that I struggle with - producing something that is liked my the majority!

good stuff i like the second one of the two

They're great!

Terrific shots.

Thanks, thanks and thanks

The only thing that detracts for me is the flare from a light source on the left of the horizon

I'm surprised you were the only person to mention it. It bugs me too, but I couldn't crop it. It was a ship on the horizon with the tiniest of little white lights. Amazing how much of a star it produced!

Where about these were taken as lovely place to take photos there

Redcar on the North East coast. The first is looking south towards Saltburn.

on both pictures i'd crop the bottom off nearly to the lights and gorynes

Dont think I would crop anything of either

I wouldn't crop them either... which is why I didn't

if you were using some flash light, I may have considered used some of the wood to bring just a little of the detail out

I did... just not enough by the look of it. I am completely new to this light painting thing too and didn't want to get in the shots myself. I wasn't sure how much I needed to move, or how much I needed to make sure the flash didn't land on me. I was dancing around like some demented idiot!

Did you shoot these in bulb mode? Any advice please.

Yes, bulb mode with the remote cable release. My main advice would be wrap up warm and take something to read. Ten minute exposures are bloody long when you're stood on an empty beach in the dark. Damned spooky too! Other than that, composition was tricky, I would spend longer working on that next time. I think I might try and find a BIG cheap torch. I would also spend longer pre focusing so that I could open the lens up a little more. I basically 'guessed' focus using the guage on the top of the lens, with a small aperture to overcompensate.

Okay... is this the longest reply post ever? I hope I haven't missed anyone.

 

[Comfortably Numb]

I like No 2 best as well but some of the flash light, for the rock, has spilt onto the sand on the left, which is a shame. You should try using a snoot maybe.

 

[laser_jock99]

You do get an intersting perspective effect with long exposures of drifting clouds. In fact if you get the angle just right- it really is like looking down two converging railway lines. To do this you have the camera facing exactly into the wind and a fairly wide angle lens. Couple this with a good silloette of something and you get a great (but largely unknown) long exposure effect. You've nearly acheived it in the first photo- but I think you're about 10 degrees out from facing exactly the direction the clouds are coming from.

Keep up the good work.

ps- ultra long exposures are 1 hour+ !!!!

 

[68lbs]

ps- ultra long exposures are 1 hour+ !!!!

Out with the ND's next time then

 

[Baldieheidit]

Brilliant. Well done

 

[bigsteve]

Yup should think he shoot them in Bulb Mode to get that very lone exposure

Hmmm. So how did you come up with 7 minutes as a good exposure time?
Was it trial and error or is there a technique for working it out? :shrug:

 

[stressless]

number 2 for me. I bet you did'nt have to walk 2 miles in the pitch black to get the shot eather, thats what Edinburgh Gary normaly makes me do with him to get the shot of the night.

Michael

 

[wull]

Stunning.. Well done

 

[Pippy_Neville]

I like these a lot, and I honestly can't pick a winner out of the two. Inspiring. I'd be tempted to try and include more star trails as they could probably add to them, but I'm probably biased coz I love star trail pictures!

 

[68lbs]

Brilliant. Well done

Stunning.. Well done

Thanks

Hmmm. So how did you come up with 7 minutes as a good exposure time? Was it trial and error or is there a technique for working it out? :shrug:

I used that age old technique of guestimation. Fire off a test shot at 2' and adjust from there. TBH, I reckon there's a lot of scope for 'playing' as it's not like you're trying to get a perfect exposure - it's dark.

I bet you did'nt have to walk 2 miles in the pitch black to get the shot eather

Nope. Though there's a patch of grass I had to cross which looked and smelt suspiciously like a dog toilet!

I'd be tempted to try and include more star trails as they could probably add to them, but I'm probably biased coz I love star trail pictures!

That sounds a good idea to me... as well as the earlier suggestion of taking the shot into the wind. I am planning to do a reshoot shortly (hopefully next week), closing down the aperture, stacking a couple of ND's and increasing the exposure time. If the weather is right (cloud and wind) I might see if I can try a 60' exposure. I'm quite addicted to this style of shot after just one attempt and it seems a good area for experimentation over winter.

 

[the ghost]

num 2 very nice

 

[EdinburghGary]

Looking forward to seeing more! Have only take 1 long exposure by night on Skye, might try for a few more before hitting my kip (shortly).