Merlin1300 Loc: New England, But Now & Forever SoTX

Agree with the HDR mavens. Set camera to auto-bracket -2, 0, +2 eV, Tripod, remote shutter release. Then to Photomatix - or whatever your favorite might be - -

Stef C Loc: Conshohocken (near philly) PA

Not sure about these two.. they don't look very clear/properly exposed. What was interesting about these?

English_Wolf Loc: Near Pensacola, FL

In your case, the suggestion of HDR is appropriate, there are so many variations in lighting that you need to consider it.

The 'bracketing suggested is wrong for JPG as the it's range is 2 stops. For RAW it almost correct (depending of your camera. RAW dynamics range is from 4 to 6, so 2 is ok.

To back to your pictures, this seems to be the only way to get something out of your picture subject choice.

Decap52 Loc: Southeast Texas

[quote=Stef C]Hello Everyone!

I have a question about night time shots/light/exposure.

Hello Stef,a little late to reply,but have you tried shooting sunset until 15-20 minutes after dark? I have taken practice pics in my backyard trying to get the effect you are after. My best results were from sunset till about 30 minutes
after sunset,depending on direction of sunset,lights ect.HDR/photo stacking would work great, but being digitally challenged :( , I try other options.

RocketScientist Loc: Littleton, Colorado

What she said. I'd go F13 or so. And maybe do it a little earlier, before the sky goes completely dark.

thomas Loc: ottawa canada

I would try 100 ISO F22 and increase your exposure time, you might have to play around with the time.

Stef C Loc: Conshohocken (near philly) PA

I will try that advice, but I though her shots were kind of boring / not great to be honest. I don't want them to end up like that...

photogrl57 Loc: Tennessee

That's just funny Stef ... your original question was asking how to get the building lit up and still be sharp on the sign ... I gave some advice and you thumbed your nose at it ... I showed you some examples of how the buildings would be lit up at a 30 second exposure and ISO of 100 ... my shots might not have been up to your standards but they were my very first night photos and still lit up more than yours even though they were boring and not great ... then someone else agrees with me and you are willing to try it .... just too funny

English_Wolf Loc: Near Pensacola, FL

Well, photogrl57 folks have offered conflicting advices, even bad advice on this subject.

Your samples are sub-par with one over exposed and the other under exposed. To say that the topic user if biased against you is not quite correct. Also, this being of your own admission, your first try, why do you take offense to the rejection?

Your first post: WB set to tungsten, is wrong as it denatures the light. When you want to keep a 'mood', you do not play with the color balance. Then your longer exposure does not correct anything but certainly will make a wash-out of everything.

The only thing that can work is to take several exposures, one per type of light, at different speed as you want the option to have 'bleeding' when creating the final product. The first picture is of the building, preferably at dusk, and then combine the images.
This is how most city scape are taken with successful results, after many tires, when you are not trained to just do this automatically.
It is not an easy subject here and simplistic answers just to not make it.

So what is needed?
Fair weather as this shot will take sometime
A chair, a cup of coffee or something stronger
A tripod as you do not want anything to move other than pedestrians, cars and the random cat pursued by a mangy, hungry, dog (photo opportunity there)
A preset ISO 400 max
A preset focusing for all the shots
A preset aperture for all the shots
An accurate light measure for each shot (only the speed changes.)
A software capable of blending the pictures taken

And, oh, yeah, a loaded gun or two if you are in a bad area.

photogrl57 Loc: Tennessee

I wasn't offended .. I found it quite humorous

Stef C Loc: Conshohocken (near philly) PA

I was willing to try it before them saying that and I did. I experimented with almost every f stop. . I just didn't see how your photos were more lit up.
One looked even more under exposed and one the opposite. I wasn't trying to offend you. I just didn't see them as a good example of what I wanted at all.

Stef C Loc: Conshohocken (near philly) PA

thank you that's all I meant. I have noticed photogrl is quick to post pictures ( and I don't mind like other ppl do) of her advice when it just seems ...'different' than some of the advice from the very best photographers on here. No hard feelings, I just didn't see evidence in those pics that would make mine better.

Stef C Loc: Conshohocken (near philly) PA

Good! Sorry if it came out snide

Coker Loc: Havana, IL

I agree with Frank, the letters are over exposed.. they a Spot metering on what you want to see exposed correctly. Set you camera for a 2 to 5 second shutter release. The time delay is to let the camera vibration calm down before the shutter is releases. Smile Bob