selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

It does but the dynamics are different.

The easiest way to get it to work is by exposing so that the blinkies just barely begin to flash (you must be shooting raw). If you go too far the colors of the brightest lights will start to change.

The histogram(s) won't help because the lights might be too small to show there.

As for noise in the shadows, the first thing to consider is whether the shadows are important. Pure black is better than noisy black. The easiest way to clean up noise in the deep shadows is to just raise the black point and obliterate it.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

At night I don't avoid overexposing lights and such at the expense of getting muddy shadows. Lights are generally expected to lack detail.

no processing D800, 80-200 F2.8, F6.3, ISO 100, 30 sec exposure

(Download)

after adjustments in Lightroom.

(Download)

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

The exposure you used (F6.3, ISO 100, 30 sec) works out to EV=0.33. According to the recommendations from Exposure value (see attached excerpt) that's about two stops brighter than the standard recommendation for "Distant views of lighted buildings". Based on that table, I would have started with 8 sec @ 5.6 or equivalent.

I don't recommend avoiding the blinkies for the street lights themselves. What I was referring to earlier was colored neon lights which are much less bright. They call for an exposure value of about 9-10. If they are blown out you will lose some or all of their color.

With adjustments during the raw conversion your image worked out nicely. It shows that the actual exposure is not critical.

Anyone trying this for the first time, since they will have the camera on a tripod anyhow, should take the time to expose such a scene +2 and -2 stops from their best guess.

(Download)

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Absolutely perfect example.

Andy

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

If I were shooting film I don't think I would have done any differently. The goal in both cases is to sacrifice the highlights and make sure you get the shadows covered. It was quite dark where I was shooting - the Cape Code Canal just north of the Bourne Bridge. Had to use a headlamp with a red filter on it so I could see my camera and not trip over the tripod legs.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Thanks!

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

You don't actually sacrifice the highlights with negative film like you do with digital. Film doesn't blow out like digital because it don't stop recording abruptly at a specific light level like 14-bit binary 16,383. Negative film usually has a round shoulder and it can accept an exposure far above the limit of digital.

I would not use film for long exposures anyhow because of reciprocity failure and color shifts that end up becoming a post processing challenge.

The only film that seems to extend the reciprocity exposure time range above 1 second is Fuji Acros and it seems to be free of reciprocity failure up to about 2 minutes and then only a half stop up to 15 minutes, according to Fuji. But why record a night scene in B&W?

If you look closely at the numbers here you can see that even digital starts to have a problem with color balance when overexposed. Look at the ratios of the maximum values of green and blue. As you get into the 8000-16000 range their proportions start to change.

When the digital raw file blows out in only one or two channels, the green channel does not seem to reach the 16,383 level although the blue channel does. Nevertheless, once all three channels blow out like they would with street lights you are left with pure white with all three channels at their maximum values.

GAS496 Loc: Arizona

Love the EV Chart Selmslie. Thanks for posting.

Jerry

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

Linda,

I do not think the link is correct. However, I did a search at the same site and came up with this link:
https://digital-photography-school.com/exposing-to-the-right-on-your-eos-camera/
Mark

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

Linda,
The link you provided does not seem to work. I did a search at the same site and found this reference to ETTR & exposing to the right.
https://digital-photography-school.com/exposing-to-the-right-on-your-eos-camera/
Mark

anotherview Loc: California

City lights after dark will present specular highlights. In my view, then, you should expose for the rest of the scene using whichever technique serves your purpose.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Sorry, I inadevertently included a colon at the end of the line. Usually I double-check after I post a link


https://digital-photography-school.com/exposing-to-the-right/

I didn't compare the info with your own link (I tried ETTR once and decided it wasn't for me).

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

I understand. Mine was different, but covered the same topic.
Thanks,
Mark

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

I just learned that trick. I was looking forward to reading that article; but it is no longer at the link you provided.

EDIT: I see this is already corrected.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Exposing to the right means pushing the histogram to the right. I use the histogram in my M43 displays to help when I feel the need to compensate exposure - whether shooting JPG or RAW or JPG+RAW. If shooting JPG I still have the choice of ETTR or ETTL - in fact it can be more important - simply because recovery of lost detail either end may not be possible. Shadows I can live with - blown highlights I cannot - ETTR will help me decide how far I dare push it. So get off your high horse.