It's a nice shot... I would have added less of the ground as it isn't ass dramatic as the sky and the reflections are pure light, not the skyline so a centered horizon doesn't seem appropiate to me.

The thing with making comments about another's photography is that no two photographers are equal, and what one likes is not what the other does. Thats why it's "art", there is no one correct way of doing it. It's about style and taste.

I'm in two minds about this. I like the effect but I feel that's all there is to it, the effect. You know, as if that's the subject of the photo. Does that make sense?

thats beautiful..
you left your shutter open for 8 mins. its that bad for the camera i have a d70 i would be terrified to do that with my camera...
how do u get such great colors? also do u bring your camera everywhere you go?
thanks
kyle

I disagree with Faby, the 2/3rds ground is the best composition. The sky is nice, but the features of the foreground are too good to miss.

Vey nice colour David, any tips on the toning? I'm sure it can't be totally natural, but yet it does 'fit'.

What I perhaps might have liked to have seen was a shot like this, but pointed away from the town and thus avoiding streetlights etc (even if they would still be reflected slightly off the clouds).

The colors what strike me first....followed by the vastness between you and the lights far behind. I tried something similar using my Sony F-717 at F-8 (max aperture) and about a minute shutter and the pic seemed way too overexposed. I can imagine what would happen if I tried it at 8 minutes! It would help if you could tell me if this was shot in complete darkeness? or if there was any light at all. Is there a special technique that you use?

I like the photo... maybe adding a little more of sky... and removing the left obscure "thing" (terrain or something like that?) will certanly help to concentrate in the photo? It seems too distracting for me...

I really like this shot. I agree the 2/3 horizon is a nice element, although to have placed the horizon on the bottom 3rd would have given so much more of that amazing pattern in the sky (assuming it continued, of course). I'm always fascinated to see the colours that long exposure night shots can produce, and this is a great example of that. I just love the streaks and purples through the sky. I would also be tempted to agree with Rodrigo on removing the land outcrop (?) on the far left. It almost seems to me that reflecting water is forming a pathway into the lights of the horizon - perhaps this effect could have been increased with a slight change in perspective to the left?

I have some similar scenery around here that I've been dying to try the same with. Unfortunately since my new camera arrived the weather has been less than forgiving. Soon.

Well when we're just learning about photografy a comment like. "This would be better if............" seems to be not apropiated. I also wnat to know what's wrong with the horizont in the middle of the picture. I got some comments about it but I really want to know if that's part of a personal opinion , if it dependes of the picture or if it is some kind of rule that I simply unknown.

I particularly like the colors in this one Dave :)

By the way. When I have the chance to see some of those constructive comments about your pictures I'am learning as well. ;)

the thing I like most about your photos is the sense of peace and
tranquility they all have, and this definately has it! The sweeping
sky and lit up horizon are beautiful. I find the colours a little
overpowering though.

Faby: I agree that a large part of this is to do with style and taste, but very few shots that I put up on chromasia are perfect, in fact none of them are perfect, so any commentary that brings me closer to being a better photographer is welcome.

nogger: yes, and in part I agree.

kyle: you could leave the shutter open for eight hours and it wouldn't harm the camera. Well, you couldn't, because the batteries would run down quite a while before then, but it wouldn't do any harm to your camera or its sensor.

Daaave: this was toned with the Curves tool. Basically the contrast was increased and I gave a slight boost to the highlights in the red and green channels as this better delineated the sky just above the horizon.

Rodrigo: the 'left thing' seemed like a good idea at the time ;-)

Ben: the sky above this shot was almost uniformly cloudy so I didn't think it would add to the shot. Had the conditions been similar to those nearer the horizon I'd have definitely included more of it.

Adriana: the 'rule', such as it is, is that most landscapes are compositionally stronger if the horizon is placed either one third up from the bottom or one third down from the top (or dead centre, but some people wouldn't agree with this one). This shot, on the other hand, places it about two fifths of the way down, thus it breaks the rule. Whether this weakens the shot is debatable, but I was slightly constrained by the lack of anything interesting immediately in front of me (hence I didn't place the horizon any higher) and the sky above this shot wasn't worth including (so I didn't lower it either). I could have zoomed in a bit, but then I would have lost the expansiveness of the shot – so the net result is a bit of a compromise.

Wow for a minute I though I was Bob's Site over at notraces.com. Then I realized that I haven't gotten there yet tonight :) I think we, as photobloggers, have to remember that we are also providing entertainment for the web surfing world. Unlike other forms of media this one, in the form of comments, is interacive.

Leaving comments like "great shot" give the viewer the chance to participate, even if they are not a classically trained photo critic. This is what makes a photoblog great, otherwise it was just be a normal website.

I have been impressed with David's ability to post something daily, and at times have even been jeolous at the amount of comments that he receives. But comments are like ratings, and Chromasia is the most viewed photoblog on the net, and that is due to his dedication to providing entertaining content. Well done.

By the way this is a "great shot".

Garth: lol, and thanks :-) And I'm glad you came here first tonight as Bob's shot blows this one away.

This is absolutely beautiful, Dave. This is the kind of shot that makes me really love Chromasia.

I actually quite like the horizon where it is, though I might have preferred it just a tad lower. I love the gradient at the bottom, though, so I wouldn't have liked the horizon too much lower. And the black shape on the left is a bit distracting, but it's no big deal, if you ask me.

Oh, and by the way, I really like your wife, but I wish she had blonde hair, and that shirt really doesn't suit her. But otherwise, she's just fine. ;) (Disclaimer: this has absolutely nothing to do with your wife. I'm sure you get the point. :)

After your long intro above you end with "two or three were too badly underexposed to use, and the rest were just crap". I love it!!

Nice shot too... :)

Wow, again.

It must be a full moon or something. I'm surprised by some of the comments and I really don't understand where they're coming from.

This shot has stunning colors. Soft textures balanced by sharper textures and a clear (bright) dividing line. The bottom in framed in darkness. A dark area on the left keeps it from feeling too symetrical. A fan pattern in the sky over an "s" pattern in the water.

And as to thirds, the middle, or whatever, the best pictures are the ones that beat the rules. There is no reason for the "rule of thirds" except that pictures are usually more interesting when it's followed as opposed to centered objects. (A more natural ratio is the golden ratio which, if memory serves, is .41, the same as the great pyramid in Egypt and the proportions of the human body as noted by DaVinci. Oh, that just happens to be the ratio you chose here. Surprise, surprise.)

All that to say, I think this shot feels just great.

This is an amazing shot! I have seen several Long Exposure shots(No Traces & Orbit 1) and I must say that they really intrigue me. Would you mind pointing us curious ones in the direction of how to go about shooting a Long Exposure? How is this done without over exposing the image? Do you have to use a light meter and some type of formula to calculate the shutter duration?

Your long exposures have been my favorite for quite some time. You always manage to create such vibrant colors.

Do you normally have to do some travelling to get to places like this or are you able to get most of your shots close to home?

After the conttroversy yesterday you go and produce this stunna!
A completely surreal shot.
For me the horizon is in exaclty the right place.. I feel the tone is just a little too blue. I 'm not saying I would turn it off entirely, but I think it's slighlty too much
My eye keeps on getting drawn to that little flare on the RH side (case for the clone brush?)

Thanks everyone.

barb and Peterv: I agree about the blue being a little overdone so have put up a slightly toned down version of the shot.

As for any questions regarding night shots: John from Orbit1 put up some excellent entries recently that go through the basics:

Night Work #1
Night Work #2
Night Work #3

I visit every day and comment sometimes when I have something to say. Usually I come here and stare in ore of your skills and wish I could take a picture like that and that's about it.

If I comment it's usually to say that I love this particular one because of X, Y & Z.

To be honest, I hardly ever manage to read all of your comments, I mean you get tons. It appears though that some people expect 110% from you every day, are these people paying for a service? Do you have subscribers that are promised this?

Personally, I love your portraits, seascapes and street photography. Yesterday's image didn't really do it for me, but that's no use knowing. How is that going to help? I tried to rack my brains to think why it didn't do it and the only thing I can think of is that as someone elase had said, the mystery had gone (compared to previous). But none-the-less, I also see the quality in it and the story it tells.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that a good photograph is a good photograph, but sometimes the overall feeling of it is subjective.

If you don't try new things and push your boundaries then life would be very dull. I suppose in a way, without the occasional out of place comment, the same thing ;0).

Better do some work now I suppose.

Shit, forgot to say anything about today's image. Really love it, again for me the horizon is just right to give loads of detail in the water and bluey pink tones that are reflected really do it for me.

Also, I think the row of lights in the distance mark the horizon and add to the image.

I need to get out and do some long exposures too me thinks.

Sorry I hadn't have time to comment before! This is lovely! Another scenery shot from you.

And I'll try to be a bit more constructive too. =) Although now- I don't find anything wrong with it.

I do agree that with your critiscm point. You should at the same time try and give an alternative (how many of us have been in a business meeting regarding something concerning work and upon asking our opinion of something had someone merely convey there unhappiness but not provide a feasible alternative?) constructive approach. This is part of learning and sharing. I did try to suggest what the aim of photography should be at least from my pespective and that is to capture a moment, an essence in just one shot.

A point I would like to pick up on also is that, without fail I look at your site everyday and I suppose that is the key.

After all this image has proved once again rewarding. Is the colour natural or added? Have we made you retreat back to what you know? I notice this is another 8minute exposure, one of your favoured approaches.

I really like this shot. It kindles feelings of sadness and contemplation. It looks like the sort of place you would go to get away from worries and stress to have a long hard think. I think this has a large part to do with the vastness of the landscape you have managed to capture, highlighted by the distance from the city lights. It's so surreal, and I love the colours!

But the longer I look at it, it gets more and more creepy. I don't think I would hang around there too long, especially since it's getting dark :)

This shot really hits me on a personal level, and that's what I look for in photography and art in general. It's a subjective thing isn't it? I don't think you could get much more of a personal slant in a comment than this, it's all based the feelings, emotions and memories this image brings to mind rather than the technical points, which really are "back of house", and beyond the scope of what I get out of this composition.

Maybe the feelings of sadness and contemplation can also be explained by the fact that I'm working on my thesis rather than going for a walk in the vast outdoors, to um..contemplate! ;-)

You've provided me with such a nice outlet through all these months of toil though. Thanks Dave!

Hmph! Oh well, almost finished. :-)

The first thing that struck me when I saw this photo was the tufts of grass in the foreground -- I think it's because they add a sense of scale to the distance between the viewer and the lights.

I happen to like the 'thing' on the left -- it, together with the clear water, seem to point in to the lights, and in particular the highest light (the tower on the pier?).

FWIW, I actually preferred the earlier version (with the richer colours).

I know about photography the same I know about rocket science, but when I see the beautiful colors and figures in your shots I have to say; "awesome, amazing, top of the line shot", just like this one. I love how the blue looks in this shot, but hey I just love the color blue.

Grate work Dave, your pictures brings me a lot of joy!

I love the line of lights in the distance -- a nice break between foreground and background. Also -- this is an EIGHT MINUTE exposure - people just don't realize how damn difficult it is to get a decent exposure these sorts of conditions -- it's tough -- never mind the composition, I swear, you have to rely on your instincts because it's near impossible to see anything through the viewfinder.

The only thing I might point out is f/16 is probably a much for night shooting -- I'd be interested Dave as to why you chose that aperture. I'll stop down to f/8 - no more -- mainly because I shoot WIDE -- and stopping down more really doesn't do much for me other than extend the time I have to stand out there and freeze my arse off (like the regionalization of terms, Dave?) ... Anyway -- I just bring this up because I get this question every day -- what aperture, what ISO, etc... I think it helps people find their way...

For those of you interested in a GREAT tutorial for night shots, go see John's entry - here -- and then click on PREV for more... I've learned EVERYTHING I know about night photography from John -- he's the man.

As far as keeping the shutter open on the D70 -- not a problem at all -- 30 minutes MAX on the D70 -- 999 minutes on the 20D -- both great cameras for night shots -- I've written a bit about the differences between the two -- mainly the D70 has a purple glow from some of the components after about 3 minutes or so -- not a real big deal for some -- but for me, the 20D doesn't have this issue - so I use the 20D for most shots these days.

Sorry for the length of the comment -- just thought I would add a few useful things -- hopefully.

I'm not a photographer so I can only say that I like what I see. :)

Your work speaks for itself and it's plain to see why your photoblog is one of the favourites on the web.

i love the glow of this...the smoothness...it all comes together. its very calming.

Readable colors. Nice.

Thanks everyone.

Bob: the reason I used f/16 is that I was hoping for the star effect around the lights that you get with small apertures, but I guess f/16 wasn't small enough ;-)

I think this shot is mediocre at best. I really like the foreground with its color and reflections, but the washed-out lights of the city (right side) ruins it. Maybe you could shoot it from a lower vantage point, hiding the lights a lttle more behind the terrain or pan it a bit to the left. I realize you need those lights to give you this color, but....

Great words above, though I think you broke your own rule with that last sentence!

I like this one.

Definitively, I can't like more this picture David, everything on it is just good enough. Congrats!!

maybe try a neagative exposure and a slower shutter speed to get the mix of color, the iso is good, but it too could have been a bit lower like 50. other wise i think it is a wonderful shot, but make sure that you try to get what you desire in the shot and dont give up too easil

Would this be a totally black image incase taken at less than 1 sec shutter speeds? I am just trying to imagine how dark it really was to the human eye, it's always hard to see with these shots. Though there must have been some light source on the water in front.
The colours are amazing I wonder how you got them, anyway it's great picture!

Wow, that is simply amazing.
You left the shutter open for 8 minutes? I didn't even think that would be possible. I suppose it was completely dark then?
I love this shot because of the colours and the calmness. It just makes me want to look at it for a long time.
I would love to have this on my wall as a poster.