<<< o >>>nine minutes later 30 comments + add yours
chromasia.com

When I initially looked at this shot I realised that this one was even more under-exposed than yesterday's – probably by almost two stops; i.e. at this aperture this should have been a 32 minute exposure! But that's the beauty of working with RAW files, they're extremely forgiving.

As for this shot: it's taken about 15' further along the beach than yesterday's and I decided to go for a slightly different colour balance with this one. One of the wonderful things about night shots is that there really isn't a 'right' colour balance; i.e. there's nothing we saw at the time that we can compare the final image to, and I think that's one of the things that makes them magical – that the camera can capture something we couldn't possibly see with our own eyes.

Oh, and I think I prefer this one to yesterday's.

And finally, Bob has excelled himself again, as has John @ Orbit1 – keeping up with those two is certainly a challenge ;-)

capture date
camera
lens
focal length
aperture
shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
ISO
flash
image quality
RAW converter
cropped?
7.58pm on 28/12/04
Canon 20D
EF 17-40 f/4L USM
17mm (27mm equiv.)
f/8.0
8m 2s
manual
+0.0
evaluative
100
no
RAW
C1 Pro
no
 
3x2 + night shots [long exposures] + fylde coast [scenic]
comment by John Washington at 08:57 PM (GMT) on 29 December, 2004

I think this is stunning. Well done

comment by buggy at 09:04 PM (GMT) on 29 December, 2004

Another great shot. I like both images however I prefer the previous one...

comment by bob at 09:04 PM (GMT) on 29 December, 2004

Dave -- you're so right -- shooting RAW is the way to go -- really most anytime, since in essence you're getting a digital negative -- something YOU can work with in the digital darkroom - NOT letting the camera run some pre-determined settings on your image - which cannot be undone. Not good.

I actually like to have my images a tad underexposed - it helps to really bring out the craziness in the sky. I'll be posting up one later tonight -- probably 2 stops underexposed -- but once I ran it through my RAW conversion process -- well, the sky is just incredible...

I really love this shot -- the rocks are outstanding ... and I love the pastel colours in the sky -- I hope to make it to this place one day -- it looks so serene and wonderful. Great job, my friend...

comment by willy at 09:34 PM (GMT) on 29 December, 2004

Wow this is amazing. Wish I had a beach near me..

comment by Chelsea June at 10:21 PM (GMT) on 29 December, 2004

Wow, these last two shots of yours are really wonderful Probably some of my favorites!

comment by mt at 11:35 PM (GMT) on 29 December, 2004

uuaaa.....the universe could be like this......

comment by miles at 11:54 PM (GMT) on 29 December, 2004

another good one Dave!

comment by Garth at 12:00 AM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

I agree weith Bob on this shot, well done. You definitely have a beautiful canvas to work with. Have a happy New Year.

comment by Aegir at 12:38 AM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

Good ol' Blackpool. Sweet pictures you're making these days. (I finally figured my camera can do longer exposures too!)

comment by miklos at 01:24 AM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

I'm kinda confused.. Both this shot and yesterday's shot are at exactly 8 minutes, 2 seconds exposure, this one at f/8.0 and yesterday's at f/10 .. but yesterday's seems a bit brighter. .. Did it get that much darker in 9 minutes? :)

comment by miklos at 01:30 AM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

Btw: I was just teasing.. Probably out of jealousy.

comment by bob at 02:38 AM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

Dave, I really like this one! The colors of the sky are incredible while the rocks in the foreground make it a bit surreal. The coastal tides where you live are interesting to me, also. It appears that when the tide goes out, it goes WAY out. That's so different from what I'm used to, where you gain or lose maybe 10-15 feet of beach.

Very cool!

comment by Jerome at 03:49 AM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

I don't know about anyone else, but that tiny bright spot near the left edge at the horizon really makes this image for me. Talk about depth... What is that, whitewater from the shore break? It appears to stand out in relief against the background. That and the strata of rock-sand-sky. I'm curious about the original exposure, though. I imagine that catching only the highlights off the rocks and water, plus a deeper sky, would be nothing less than eerie.

I got a nice tripod for Christmas. Never owned one before. I think I know what I'm going to do with it. :)

comment by djn1 at 05:30 AM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

miklos: when the moon was behind the clouds it was really dark. As an example of how dark: somebody walked past mid-exposure and I didn't see them till they were about 15' away – beyond that they were effectively invisible.

bob: I'm not exactly sure but the tide goes out at least a third of a mile.

Jerome: those lights on the left of the horizon may well be the Lennox satellite platform, an oil and gas platform in the Irish Sea, but I wouldn't want to swear to it as I can't find a decent nautical map to confirm it.

comment by Tristan.NET at 06:24 AM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

great shot. btw, have you considered making this pop up window larger? at least for me, the window doesn't even cover your initial photo info text without scrolling.

comment by P at 07:28 AM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

amazing. i can't wait for the rain to stop out here and for the moon to come out. like Jerome, i've got a new tripod that needs a workout. :)

comment by barb at 12:51 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

I have a bit of a problem with this one and the previous' day photos.
Are they nightshots mimicking day light conditions? They convey no sense of nighttime..... am I missing something?
The same goes for Bob's shots but they appear more grounded in
"reality".

Today's photo in particular has a strong sense of surreality due to the
colours that (for my tastes anyway) are not harmonizing at all. Brown and purple/pink seems such an odd match.

Having said that I really adore your work and feel a bit stupid making
my first comment a negative one.

kind regards, barb. (Australia)

comment by andre at 01:37 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

Almost looks like the images you would expect from another planet...a wet Mars perhaps.

comment by ross at 01:44 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

You're photos are amazing. Another reason why I keep you in my daily bookmarks. Thanks for sharing your view of the world with me and everyone else. I might have to buy some prints now ... didn't know you sold them.

comment by Jorge at 01:55 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

Oh My God! Beautiful shoot. Happy New Year Everyone!

comment by Tor at 03:00 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

This image is just great. Beautiful colors and taken in the middle of the night - unbelivable. Well done David.

comment by Pearl at 03:21 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

This is my first encounter with your photography and am very pleased with what I see. Keep up the good work. Will check in from time to time.

Pearl

comment by frisky? at 04:53 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

brilliant work here dave. the rocks and the colurs in the sky really make the shot.

comment by tobias at 05:23 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

Hmmm, sorry, a bit thick here really, so you exposed this (beautiful, prefer it to the prev) image for eight mins? Correct. Yet the sky looks rather bright, I mean, how dark was it? Also, are you experienced enough to know it required that or did you take a number of shots. A rather curious approach. I really do love it though, the sky highlights the choclatey vividness of the pebbles...

comment by R at 09:04 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

Ok. I am absolutely loving the night shots that you guys are taking and have been contemplating my own go of it.

Besides the basic exposure times vs fstops my biggest obstacle/challenge is going to be my location; Dallas, TX.
They have nothing here but empty flat land but I am just the man to rise to the occasion. Oh... if I was only back in my native So. Calif - I'm convinced water is the photographers best friend!

BTW: Thanks for the kind support David regarding that wedding I was shooting a couple weeks back. I learned alot about my flash (and what not to do with it). I have invested in a soft box for it that does wonders for spreading light and will have another go at it this weekend at another wedding New Years day. I will also share my night time experiments with you and welcome your comments, suggestions.

Happy New Years to all...

comment by m at 09:39 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

:-)

comment by djn1 at 11:21 PM (GMT) on 30 December, 2004

Thanks everyone.

Tristan.NET: thanks. As for the popup window: if I make it any bigger it becomes unmanageable on an 800x600 screen, and I know there aren't all that many people who still use that resolution, but there are still a few around.

barb: I guess the surreal feel to these shots is the point. An accurate shot of this scene would be a mostly black screen, so rather than try to produce some sort of more or less accurate representation the aim is to exploit the technology to produce something that otherwise couldn't be perceived. This scene is there, but not accessible to our ordinary perception – a camera's sensor is cumulative whereas a retinal image continuously decays.

ross: feel free :-)

tobias: have a read back through my description and the various comments.

R: water is good, but so is any foreground interest – an old barn, a tree, some shrubs – get out there and give it a try :-)

comment by Christine at 09:22 AM (GMT) on 31 December, 2004

Amazing, amazing, amazing. Your photographs always seem to leave me breathless.

comment by Mathieu at 08:54 PM (GMT) on 1 January, 2005

I like the composition of this photo.

Sky colors are great !

comment by Ryan Rahn at 08:47 AM (GMT) on 28 January, 2005

Love the colors...especially in the sky!

Nice detail in the rocks as well.