would flash fill help with this image?

[lexie]

i was taking some shots of a bridge last night playing again with long exposures and although some came out well i was dissappointed that this one is very dark in the foreground. would a bit of flash help highlight the foreground? i should have thought to try it last night but it was starting to rain and to be honest i was freezing lol

 

[Dal]

Not really. Try taking 2 shots and blending them together. 1 for the foreground and 1 for the background.

 

[lexie]

i'll try that next time, cheers dude

 

[swanseamale47]

I would be tempted to try shooting when it's nearly dark but still has a hint of light in the sky.
You'll need a good flash to light it in one go, might be better off "painting" it with several hand blasts from a held flash (or a lamp)

 

[lexie]

Thanks for the tip wayne, i'll give it a go. I was trying a couple of other shots before i got to this one, and with the light fading so fast these days i guess i ran out of time.

 

[CT]

What a shame - this was potentialy a really nice shot as you can see with the gamma adjusted...

The problem is it's way under-exposed and you can't recover from that much under-exposure without artifacts appearing - particularly noticeable in the sky in my edit.

The trick is to expose for the foreground and let the lights look after themselves. There's definitely a nice shot there though so it's well worth going back.

 

[lexie]

ct thanks for the advice and the edit. i'll definitely be heading back to try and do it justice next time. i think this was about 8secs/f10@iso400 so i'm taking it that a longer exposure should bring more out of the foreground?

 

[CT]

so i'm taking it that a longer exposure should bring more out of the foreground?

Absolutely. The thing is though these shots are never easy. My approach would be to start with the same exposure you did last time, then increase the exposure in 1 stop increments (using shutter speeds not apertures) till it looks good on the preview screen - job done.

 

[lexie]

thanks dude you're a legend. i'll post the results here to show the difference when i get it done.

 

[CT]

See you do. It should only take three or four shots at most to nail it. In fact slight over-exposure would be better as it's easier to adjust in PP and you'd tend to get less noise.

When in doubt - bracket like ****!

 

[iain67]

Looking at the edited version i think that could be a real top shot,like it very much.

 

[Oggy]

The sort of flash you'd need for that was abolished by the Strategic Arms Limitations talks.

 

[lexie]

ok so i went back to the same location tonight to try a few different shutter speeds and experimenting with using the flash.

here's a couple with the flash used (colour as it was shot and then converted to b+w)
8 seconds, f10@iso400 as with the shot at the top

and a longer shutter used on this one(again colour and b+w)
25 seconds,f/10@iso400-no flash

i changed positions a couple of times due to flare from some of the lights.

let me know what you think folks

 

[CT]

Well No2 (The first mono) is a clear winner for me there. Curious that you say it was the same exposure as your first shot as it's much better exposed when in fact it should look pretty much the same unless you've adjusted levels in editing? The flash would have had no affect at all beyond perhaps a few feet in front of the camera. However you've managed though, it's a good job done and was well worth going back. If anything it's perhaps a bit light and you might want to darken it a bit for some more atmosphere, but it's largely down to taste.

The colour shots are way too red for me, but that's the effect you get with those street lights at night. You really needed to set the wb to Tungsten to get a moe realistic result.

 

[lexie]

Well No2 (The first mono) is a clear winner for me there. Curious that you say it was the same exposure as your first shot as it's much better exposed when in fact it should look pretty much the same unless you've adjusted levels in editing? The flash would have had no affect at all beyond perhaps a few feet in front of the camera. However you've managed though, it's a good job done and was well worth going back. If anything it's perhaps a bit light and you might want to darken it a bit for some more atmosphere, but it's largely down to taste.

The colour shots are way too red for me, but that's the effect you get with those street lights at night. You really needed to set the wb to Tungsten to get a moe realistic result.

the only editing applied was a quick sharpen and some noise reduction using gimp, then the light trail from a plane overhead removed.
i have a few shots of this with different exposures, some a little darker some a little lighter this was just the one i prefered myself.
the colour ones are always a bit of a problem area for me because i'm colourblind (hence the fondness for b+w lol), but i'll try changing the wb and see how it goes
thanks for all the help dude, i appreciate it.