Fire on the Horizon

About an hour after sunset the horizon lit up like it was on fire.

This image is NOT post-processed...this is what came out of the

camera! Any thoughts or comments are greatly appreciated!

If you look, you'll see that there is a very similar shot to this in the same folder from another day. I wanted to go back and shoot the shot again because 1) the other image was produced by cropping and I wanted to get a full resolution file 2) the other image was post-processed and 3) I always try to shoot good compositions on several different sunsets since every one is different. I was just about to leave about 45 minutes after sunset when all of a sudden the horizon just lit up. This image is not post-processed...this is straight out of the camera! I did take the RAW file and also produce an exposure using fluorescent white balancing. While I did like how doing that made the boats white and took away some of the artificial light glow, I wasn't sure if I liked how it made the clouds look purple. While neither is an exact replication of everything my eye saw, I thought this version with auto white balancing was closer to reality (which is my goal in photography). I will attach the file of the same shot just with fluorescent white balancing to this post. I would be very interested in what you guys have to say in comparison. I just started shooting RAW a few weeks ago so am still very new to the "developing" of images--I just started trying to adjust white balance for the first time last night.

You know, the more I look at it the more the fluorescent balanced shot grows on me...I still am not sure about the purple tinted clouds but the bottom half of the picture sure does look nice, especially having the boats really be white! I'm eager to hear opinions comparing the 2 exposures, or on this shot in general. Thanks!

Tyler, I'm noticing a DOF issue -- the foreground is nicely focused, but it blurs in the far background. Doesn't look like your tripod is moving. Have you tried shooting at 30sec shutter and bracketing the aperture? (f22 or smaller) That's what I did with my pier shots. The lens I used can stop down to F32 which gives the sharp DOF. - Brent

Ok...I got you...this is also f/8 at about 65mm and is focused on the closest object (the white boat to the left). According to my calculations, that should take my focus to infinity, but I could definitely be wrong (just started using the DOF scales). That white boat is quite some distance from me. I used to shoot all landscape shots at f/32 (or whatever is smallest) but I've been cautioned against that because 1) the closer to f/8 you are (and especially anything over f/22) image quality suffers and 2) my lens is sharpest at f/8. Could what you are seeing in the background be boats moving in the water? I'd be happy to try this shot at f/32, although the exposure time would be out of this world...I think this one was about 30 seconds. Please let me know your further thoughts and how I should approach this issue--I do appreciate you bringing it up and offering your input!

Superb effort, Tyler. I really like the photo the way it is, but some p.netters may fuss about the horizon being in the center of your frame. It's a great shot. Very well done.

Gorgeous composition!

Keith and Steve--Thank you for your comments. About the horizon, I tried to move it slightly so it is not PERFECTLY centered but I agree it is still in the middle 1/3. Normally I try to follow those composition "rules" but this is one time when I say FORGET THE RULES! :) I'm a big fan of this composition (besides, last time when I posted a shot with more foreground people said there was too much water). I think I like this composition and feel it still works because even though the horizon is near the center, the main "line" of objects, the boats, is around the bottom 1/3 of the composition. I'm glad you guys like the shot and appreciate the heads-up on the horizon. Normally I go back and reshoot with the composition altered to match most every comment I get but I think I'm pretty confident in this shot exactly how it is. I actually do have bracketed exposures of just about every possible composition of this from last night--I have 2/3 sky, 2/3 water, zoomed out, zoomed in, etc. I must say I really worked this sunset well and honestly can say I think this was one of the best compositions and results. Thanks again for the input!

Tyler, I love this image just as is, f8 is your sweet spot, but I shoot my landscapes at f11 or higher. I don't know where you find time to get out and take such wonderful photos. Normally you don't see the horizon at the mid-point, the rule of thirds usually applies. Sometimes it just can't be helped, cropping would destroy the image. LOL in your future endeavors. I had a TKR in Dec. 2006 and was walking without help at 10 days. My doctors were really pleased with my progress.

How do YOU get out and shoot such great shots only a month after TKR?!?! :) Hope rehab is going well and you are getting back to normal...it will be months before you appreciate the full benefit.

 

About the aperture here--as I said, I used to shoot everything at f/32 (which I understand is overkill) but I have been cautioned against that and told my image will suffer, even if I don't see it on the computer (I was told you see it when enlarged). Regardless, for this shot I'm shooting at 65mm and that first boat is about 400 feet or more away from me. According to the DOF chart I checked out at dofmaster.com, with my camera at f/8, if the focal point is only 100 feet away my near sharpness is 48 feet and focus should go to infinity. Given that, is there any reason to use a smaller aperture? I could certainly use f/11 on future shots if necessary as it would still keep my exposure times reasonable. I believe this shot was in the 20-30 second range at f/8 (I don't have the specs in front of me at the moment). If the nearest focal point is closer to me in the future I certainly will not hesitate to dial down the aperture a bit. My approach is that I use the DOF charts on dofmaster.com and then use what is necessary to get my DOF to infinity, keeping in mind that my lens is sharpest around f/8. Thanks for the comments!

Tyler, you are absolutely right about the numbers on the DOF scale. what you need to now figure is the deviation your lens has from the theoretical limits. to do this, you will need to take notes because the camera will not record your focus. bracket your distances from f/8 to f/22. while your lens sweet spot if f/8, that doesn't follow true in long exposures. remember, a pinhole camera has infinite DOF, but it takes minutes to expose a shot. back with film we had to find out for ourselves what was the real ASA rating because it kind of floated around from batch to batch. anyway, what i mean is, experiment to find out what your gear will do and not what its supposed to do.

 

this shot has more shadow detail than the other one and has a better reflection. overall this is an improved version. take care my friend. J.K.

I'm going to refrain from all the technical jargon, in spite of the good equipment I own I'm pretty much a point and shoot photographer so with that said I will add my compliments to this composition.....I think you've positioned everything in the frame just about perfectly....if you had not left in the foreground you would of chopped off the reflections of the masts, they add to the beauty of the image, the boats and buildings are the center of attention and there they sit "center stage" where they should be, and to top it off you've got that lovely sky for the crowning glory. My advice would be "if you're satisfied with and like this composition then that's good enough". I don't do a lot of editing on my images, I use Elements 5 and it provides me with the few adjustments I care to make to my imagery. You're doing a good job Tyler, keep it up.

JK and Susan--Thank you for stopping by and leaving your kind comments. I appreciate them very much. Susan, I agree with your composition analysis!

 

Thanks for the technical help, JK. Can I make sure I understand what you are saying? So, my lens is sharpest at f/8 (roughly) during the day BUT this changes with long exposures at night (ie-"sharpest" at day and night are not necessarily the same). If I were to shoot with a pinhole camera I would have great DOF, but a one hour exposure and probably have to deal with diffraction. So, I want to find a good happy medium and also find my lens' long exposure "sweet spot" (which may or may not be the same as the daytime "sweet spot"). So, what you suggest that I do is evaluate my own equipment by shooting various aperture values at longer exposures and examining the results, right? No one had told me anything about the lens' "sweet spot" changing with long exposures so I'm glad you brought this up. I have actually been asking a lot of similar questions about this topic and learning a lot in the forum--if you care to see the conversation it's in the "Everything Else" forum and titled "Quality at Different Apertures." Here is the link:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00JbXk

 

Thanks again to both you for stopping by and leaving some comments--I really appreciate them!

It's great you are able to go back to places and photograph them under different conditions. My nitpick from the previous post was the bright (uncontrollable-by-you) light on the right side. That being gone does make this, IMO, a better shot. Looks like the masses agree. While I agree that there are some rules that can improve a composition, if we allow them to DICTATE what our compositions are then they will all start to look the same. Sometimes a shot will be spectacular, like this one, despite ; ) the horizon being centered. Congrats on a great photo earned through diligence and hard work.

Shawn--I appreciate your kind words as well as your constructive critiques. Many people on this site turn their nose up at critiques and while I can't say that I agree with every one I've ever received, I can say that I generally take them to heart. I post the first shot I shoot of a place and ask for feedback...there are often little details--the light you pointed out in the previous version is one such example. In one of my night bridge shots someone pointed out that the piling was at the same height as the bridge and would look better higher or lower. I always go back and reshoot these shots with those constructive ideas in mind. When shooting this shot, I spent time making sure that the bright light on the right side was hidden by one of the shrimp boats. Sometimes the suggestions of others work, sometimes they don't. But I generally have each and every one in mind when I go out to reshoot on a different day and at least then I can compare the versions side by side and pick what I like the best. Thanks for your assistance with my photography--you personally helped me improve this shot and I appreciate it!

Nice work Tyler ... I, personally, like the tone and lighting in this image over the other similar (same) image you have posted ... just a preference. As for composition and rules of thirds ... as you stated, sometimes you have to work with what you have and include the scene as it speaks to you when you look through the lens. There is always post work and/or the ability to take additional images while at the scene to compare after-the-fact. Or, as you stated, return and capture again ... if you have that option. Without being there, I do not feel that you can crop or change much for this image if your intention is to include the sunset and such. As a bonus: I do like the left side and believe you have an image-within-an-image if you crop a tight horizontal crop just underneath boat reflection carry across just past the mid-tree, include the small boat and then crop just above the red-lit cloud. All in all, this image is balanced and has great tone and reflections. All in all, excellent work, detail, composition, d.o.f., etc., etc.!

Stephan--Thank you very much for your thoughtful and in depth critique. I also am very appreciative of your idea for an alternate composition/crop. I've attached what I think you were describing. Will you take a look at it and see if I'm understanding what is in your head? I think this is creek is a goldmine for good pictures, especially with the artificial and natural lighting mix so I'm appreciative of all the ideas I can gather! Thanks!

I'm a huge fan of morning light, and you have done a great job here. I was sent here to view your portfolio by another member, so even with such little experience you have come a huge distance,and have developed a bit of a following. Well done. I see many people are making great suggestions for developing and refining your art. The great Canadian artist Freeman Patterson has a few books that have influenced me, "The Art of Seeing" "Photography For The Joy Of It" and "Photography of Natural Things" These are not new books but they are often found in great old book stores and I thing you can still get them at Freemans Web site.

 

Also if you have a chance to go to the nikon school, they used to have a traveling road show. It is a great experience about 10,000 images in 8 hours National Geographic has a leadership video series one of which is on creativity in the workplace. I saw it while doing my Master in Leasership. A yound Doctor could probably get the hospital to spring for that one as part of your CME credits.

 

I use photography to enhance almost everything I do In fact I used photography to formulate the question of my thesis by starting with a class group picture and honing it down to one high contrast line drawing of one unique individual in my class. Another project required system thinking, so I photographed every electrical component on my Crestline ambulance and demonstrated how to troubleshoot a faulty fuse using only pictures and a few well chosen words of direction. Bring your art to work and school and keep it alive in you. Let it be a big part of your life long learning. Good luck and keep capturing light and shadows.