unsure on how i would shoot a 30 min exposure with people

phildaintith

phildaintith

Suspended / Banned
Messages
325
Name
phil
Edit My Images
No
ok well im planning on having a couple holding hands with a massive star trail over them like in this pic from the other night - http://www.flickr.com/photos/phildaintithphotography/4365558150/
BUT i am unsure how i would shoot it with people as they cannot stay exactly stil for 30 mins or so...

in your opinion do you think if i took 2 seperate pictures one with the couple in flashed and then another with the star trail and flash the foreground and use the lasoo tool or something on ps to put them in.

if you can understand what im trying to get at please throw over any knowledge you may have :)

cheers, phil
 
That should work, but as an alternative, you could do it with one single shot. Flash them in at the beginning and then simply have them leave the scene. If you need a 30 minute exposure for the ambient light the camera will not even register them in the few seconds it takes to simply walk away.

As an example on a much smaller scale, here is a 1 second exposure. Despite the firework trails the subject lit by flash is essentially frozen by the flash and the other movement is invisible. With less ambient light the job should be even easier.....

20071103_221531_1032_LR.jpg
 
its me and a friend doing it so i would not be able to flash the foreground other than the mounted flash and they will also appear 'ghosted' if they leave the frame as part of the sky will be where the torsos are which will be undesireable...

was hoping theres some crazy or just standard ps technique that could help me and all i can think of so far is a 30 sec flashed and then lasoo them into the star trailed one. but then theres the chance the exposures wont match if you get me...

cheers, phil
 
I personally would do a 30 second exposure and towards the end, get the couple to run in the shot quickly and "Strobe" them...

That way the "Data" in the image does not overwrite them and they will actually overwrite whatever they would be blocking the view of.
 
Post withdrawn. I was talking nonsense.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
why at the beginning?
Click to expand...

Well of course it doesn't matter when you execute the flash, but if at the beginning you will only have the movement of them leaving the scene, not entering it too. Also, they can already adopt the correct pose in advance and focusing can be established, so that's more faffing about dismissed with. Finally, once they have been shot they can go and have a cup of tea rather than hanging around waiting for the right moment to be called into the scene.
 
gazedd said:
I personally would do a 30 second exposure and towards the end, get the couple to run in the shot quickly and "Strobe" them...

That way the "Data" in the image does not overwrite them and they will actually overwrite whatever they would be blocking the view of.
Click to expand...

The "data" as you put it won't get "overwritten". All the sensor is doing is accumulating photons of light. It won't matter at all whether it gets the flashed bodies first and then the sky, or the other way round. The sensor won't know the difference. All it will do is to carry on accumulating charge in each sensel.

e.g. you can't undo a bright exposure simply by holding a black card in front of the camera. The more light it sees the brighter the image gets. You can't take back the light after it has been captured. Put another way 2+17 = 19 and 17+2 also = 19. The end result is the same. I hope that makes sense.

p.s. I am assuming the exposure for the sky (other than the star trails themselves) will be pretty low. Otherwise you could end up with the sky exposure cobtributing way too much to the flash exposure of the subjects, basically ruining the shot. If the sky is not very dark, by the end of the exposure, then the people will be spoiled. Merging two exposure together would be the better bet.
 
I agree, better to do it at the begining.:)

Of course if you do not want or can get them there at all, shoot them with flash against a white background and drop them in as a layer using the darken blending mode. ;)
 
This sounds very similar to a well known shot amongst action sport photographers by Grant Gunderson (in fact it is the first one on his website), that was a 4 hour exposure with the skier in at the end, however to stop the skier looking washed out, he was framed against a background tree rather than the sky.
 
In all honesty, unless you live in an area that has extremely dark skies, a single 30 minute exposure is going to leave you with an overexposed sky due to light pollution.

You would be much better off taking several exposures of 30 secs or even 1 minute, and then stacking them all together. Having your people exposed in one of those shots should be relatively simple.
 
A very good point, Derek. I have had to go back and modify a couple of my posts. I was assuming a dark sky, or the subjects not in silhouette against the sky, but rather some other dark background that would not superimpose its own image over the top of the people. I think in hindsight that at least two exposures would be better, but like you say, it may need more.
 
No, and I have no plans to. I think the current pricing is outrageous and I am quite happy with my current camera lineup. When I think that I paid just £2200 for my brand new 1D3, 14 months ago, £4,000+ for the 1D4 is ridiculous. I wouldn't buy one if it cost £3000. It's still too much. Even at £2500 I would not be tempted. I simply don't need one.

My next major purchase will almost certainly be a fast prime - probably a 300/2.8 - but first I'd rather work on my own skills before parting with any more money.

EDIT : I've just seen that DPReview have a review of the 1D4. I haven't read it and I won't. But I did look at the conclusions page - http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dmarkIV/page32.asp. If you remove the comments that are in common with the 1D3, and delete the comments about video, which I have no interest in, there isn't much left that justifies the huge leap in price.

EDIT : A brand new 1D3 can still be bought today for £2261 including VAT and delivery - http://www.digitalrev.com/en/canon-eos-1d-mark-iii-dslr-1884.html?category_id=0.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top