Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
How to shoot Welcome to Fabulous Las Vegas, Nevada Welcome sign.
Page 1 of 2 next>
Aug 14, 2012 17:05:09   #
ramcasty Loc: california
 
Hello everyone!

Can anyone tell me on how to shoot the Las Vegas Welcome sign while my subject still on focus during night time?

Thank you,

Ram

Reply
Aug 14, 2012 19:46:34   #
Buzz Lightyear
 
You've got to give us more information on the camera you are using . . . like does it even have the ability to manually set exposure, ISO, shutter speed, and what kind of lens, etc.

Reply
Aug 15, 2012 01:16:56   #
ramcasty Loc: california
 
Hi buzz,

Sorry Im so excited sharing my issues but not sharing what camera im using, anyway im using canon 60D with kit lens 18-135mm but i do have 10-22mm, please advice what setting should i set on my DSLR.

Thanks for your time...

Reply
 
 
Aug 15, 2012 05:30:35   #
ramcasty Loc: california
 
Hi buzz,

Here's the pic i took from last night ... My settings are 85mm f14, 1/30, ISO 800, please advice what went wrong.

tnx



Reply
Aug 15, 2012 08:38:58   #
Bangee5 Loc: Louisiana
 
ramcasty wrote:
Hi buzz,

Here's the pic i took from last night ... My settings are 85mm f14, 1/30, ISO 800, please advice what went wrong.

tnx


You could have used the build-in flash on your subject.

Reply
Aug 15, 2012 08:41:01   #
GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City
 
Bangee5 wrote:
ramcasty wrote:
Hi buzz,

Here's the pic i took from last night ... My settings are 85mm f14, 1/30, ISO 800, please advice what went wrong.

tnx


You could have used the build-in flash on your subject.


I think the poster did.

ramcasty- was that f/14 or f/1.4?

Reply
Aug 15, 2012 09:18:52   #
pounder35 Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"
 
ramcasty wrote:
Hello everyone!

Can anyone tell me on how to shoot the Las Vegas Welcome sign while my subject still on focus during night time?

Thank you,

Ram


Don't have too much distannce between the subjects and sign since you'll probably be working with larger aperture settings hence less depth of field. Using a wider angle lens rather than a longer focal lenght will also improve DOF. I have a photo I took when we took my son and some of his friends there for his 21st birthday. They are in front of the sign but not blocking it. Three of them are holding the fourth horizontaly with his head cocked up on his hand like laying on the beach. Funny photo. I'll post it if I can find it.

Reply
 
 
Aug 15, 2012 11:54:53   #
historian65 Loc: Holtville, Callifornia
 
Other than perhaps using some fill flash technique, I think you nailed it. The camera gave you what your eyes can see in that situation. There is a lot of darkness in the image beause there is a lot of darkness in the scene. Are you trying to light up the whole area in your image? If you are, you can do so by putting the camera on a tripod and doing a timed release with fill flash for the person but be prepared for the neon to be washed out. Unless you are a Hollywood studio with a lot of tenners (10,000 watt photoflood) to illuminate the background, you will have to settle for an image that is like what your eye can see. Modern Photography several decades ago told its readers that the could record the evening scene as their eye saw it by using Tri-X Pan at ASA400, 1/30th, and an f/stop of 1.9. I tried it and using normal processing, shot at ASA400, 1/60th, and left the lens wide open for whatever the f/stop would allow and got very good images. I got alot of darkness because there was a lot of darkness but the highlights were good. It is like the old question posed to photographers wanting to shoot a picture of the moon..."What film, f/stop, and shutter speed would you use?" I remember how many people tried to figure out long exposures and really over-thinking the thing. It turned out that the problem was too many light meters (and photographers) were incorporating the darkness into the problem. The answer, of course, was a tripod if you wished to eliminate motion of the camera with a long lens but the ASA was 125 at f/16 for 125th of a second. Why? Because the illumination on the moon was equivalent to the earth at a bright sunny day at noon and that was the exposure for outdoors at that time. Simple when you think about it but it is all that darkness that fools everyone. Good luck.

Reply
Aug 15, 2012 14:07:18   #
K7DJJ Loc: Spring Hill, FL
 
ramcasty wrote:
Hi buzz,

Here's the pic i took from last night ... My settings are 85mm f14, 1/30, ISO 800, please advice what went wrong.

tnx


If you make a duplicate layer and change its mode to screen, you can lighten up the whole photo. If the sign gets too bright just mask the top layer over the sign.



Reply
Aug 15, 2012 14:11:08   #
pounder35 Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"
 
K7DJJ wrote:
ramcasty wrote:
Hi buzz,

Here's the pic i took from last night ... My settings are 85mm f14, 1/30, ISO 800, please advice what went wrong.

tnx


If you make a duplicate layer and change its mode to screen, you can lighten up the whole photo. If the sign gets too bright just mask the top layer over the sign.


Nice job! :thumbup:

Reply
Aug 15, 2012 14:15:19   #
barry.lapoint Loc: Colorado
 
historian65 wrote:
Other than perhaps using some fill flash technique, I think you nailed it. The camera gave you what your eyes can see in that situation. There is a lot of darkness in the image beause there is a lot of darkness in the scene. Are you trying to light up the whole area in your image? If you are, you can do so by putting the camera on a tripod and doing a timed release with fill flash for the person but be prepared for the neon to be washed out. Unless you are a Hollywood studio with a lot of tenners (10,000 watt photoflood) to illuminate the background, you will have to settle for an image that is like what your eye can see. Modern Photography several decades ago told its readers that the could record the evening scene as their eye saw it by using Tri-X Pan at ASA400, 1/30th, and an f/stop of 1.9. I tried it and using normal processing, shot at ASA400, 1/60th, and left the lens wide open for whatever the f/stop would allow and got very good images. I got alot of darkness because there was a lot of darkness but the highlights were good. It is like the old question posed to photographers wanting to shoot a picture of the moon..."What film, f/stop, and shutter speed would you use?" I remember how many people tried to figure out long exposures and really over-thinking the thing. It turned out that the problem was too many light meters (and photographers) were incorporating the darkness into the problem. The answer, of course, was a tripod if you wished to eliminate motion of the camera with a long lens but the ASA was 125 at f/16 for 125th of a second. Why? Because the illumination on the moon was equivalent to the earth at a bright sunny day at noon and that was the exposure for outdoors at that time. Simple when you think about it but it is all that darkness that fools everyone. Good luck.
Other than perhaps using some fill flash technique... (show quote)


You're making this too hard. It is simple. Tripod to expose the sign correctly and use rear curtain sync on your flash to expose the person correctly at the very end of the exposure.

Reply
 
 
Aug 15, 2012 14:18:15   #
pounder35 Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"
 
barry.lapoint wrote:
historian65 wrote:
Other than perhaps using some fill flash technique, I think you nailed it. The camera gave you what your eyes can see in that situation. There is a lot of darkness in the image beause there is a lot of darkness in the scene. Are you trying to light up the whole area in your image? If you are, you can do so by putting the camera on a tripod and doing a timed release with fill flash for the person but be prepared for the neon to be washed out. Unless you are a Hollywood studio with a lot of tenners (10,000 watt photoflood) to illuminate the background, you will have to settle for an image that is like what your eye can see. Modern Photography several decades ago told its readers that the could record the evening scene as their eye saw it by using Tri-X Pan at ASA400, 1/30th, and an f/stop of 1.9. I tried it and using normal processing, shot at ASA400, 1/60th, and left the lens wide open for whatever the f/stop would allow and got very good images. I got alot of darkness because there was a lot of darkness but the highlights were good. It is like the old question posed to photographers wanting to shoot a picture of the moon..."What film, f/stop, and shutter speed would you use?" I remember how many people tried to figure out long exposures and really over-thinking the thing. It turned out that the problem was too many light meters (and photographers) were incorporating the darkness into the problem. The answer, of course, was a tripod if you wished to eliminate motion of the camera with a long lens but the ASA was 125 at f/16 for 125th of a second. Why? Because the illumination on the moon was equivalent to the earth at a bright sunny day at noon and that was the exposure for outdoors at that time. Simple when you think about it but it is all that darkness that fools everyone. Good luck.
Other than perhaps using some fill flash technique... (show quote)


You're making this too hard. It is simple. Tripod to expose the sign correctly and use rear curtain sync on your flash to expose the person correctly at the very end of the exposure.
quote=historian65 Other than perhaps using some f... (show quote)


Good point if you have rear curtain sync. :thumbup:

Reply
Aug 15, 2012 14:20:17   #
barry.lapoint Loc: Colorado
 
pounder35 wrote:
barry.lapoint wrote:
historian65 wrote:
Other than perhaps using some fill flash technique, I think you nailed it. The camera gave you what your eyes can see in that situation. There is a lot of darkness in the image beause there is a lot of darkness in the scene. Are you trying to light up the whole area in your image? If you are, you can do so by putting the camera on a tripod and doing a timed release with fill flash for the person but be prepared for the neon to be washed out. Unless you are a Hollywood studio with a lot of tenners (10,000 watt photoflood) to illuminate the background, you will have to settle for an image that is like what your eye can see. Modern Photography several decades ago told its readers that the could record the evening scene as their eye saw it by using Tri-X Pan at ASA400, 1/30th, and an f/stop of 1.9. I tried it and using normal processing, shot at ASA400, 1/60th, and left the lens wide open for whatever the f/stop would allow and got very good images. I got alot of darkness because there was a lot of darkness but the highlights were good. It is like the old question posed to photographers wanting to shoot a picture of the moon..."What film, f/stop, and shutter speed would you use?" I remember how many people tried to figure out long exposures and really over-thinking the thing. It turned out that the problem was too many light meters (and photographers) were incorporating the darkness into the problem. The answer, of course, was a tripod if you wished to eliminate motion of the camera with a long lens but the ASA was 125 at f/16 for 125th of a second. Why? Because the illumination on the moon was equivalent to the earth at a bright sunny day at noon and that was the exposure for outdoors at that time. Simple when you think about it but it is all that darkness that fools everyone. Good luck.
Other than perhaps using some fill flash technique... (show quote)


You're making this too hard. It is simple. Tripod to expose the sign correctly and use rear curtain sync on your flash to expose the person correctly at the very end of the exposure.
quote=historian65 Other than perhaps using some f... (show quote)


Good point if you have rear curtain sync. :thumbup:
quote=barry.lapoint quote=historian65 Other than... (show quote)


Yup, you are absolutely right. You have to have the ability to set rear curtain sync...sorry.

Reply
Aug 15, 2012 14:25:24   #
pounder35 Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"
 
I'm not sure if I have it. :roll: :lol: I rarely use flash. Guess I'll pull out the manual and see. :roll:

Reply
Aug 15, 2012 21:50:41   #
photosbysexton Loc: Knoxville, TN
 
What brand camera has a "rear" curtain flash. I've only seen a first or second curtain flash.

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.