Wow, nice. You got a clear night all right. This is for our entertainment room where we watch some movies at night, so we were looking for something dark, and color. That b&w of Daniel Thorp's is mind-blowingly awesome and makes me pause too, but I wonder about how much is Photoshopped? Does someone know? The moon and clouds look like they were placed there. Don't get me wrong, I love it and would consider a print but if it's on our walls we're gonna get asked.
Dan probably won’t answer that question anymore, but you might ask him if/when you see him in person. From my chats with him, Nature’s Night Light is a [url=http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=88013
] multi-exposure photo taken on March 2008[/url] in the middle of the night on an amazing clear night with puffy clouds in the hills of Oakland, CA. He was trying to capture the image that he saw that night on the way home from long day at work – the city below puffy clouds with the moon above the clouds. So... he broke into the backyard of his old house, set up his tripod and attempted to capture what he saw.
And this very photo nearly made him quit photography.
To his surprise, he made the front page of Digg and had over 22,000 views on flickr, but the attention also brought numerous critical people who questioned and attacked him on the authenticity of photo since they believed that “real” photos are the ones that are “straight of camera” – these beautiful panos that you're trying to create would be considered “fake” by their definitions since they are not SOC and used a program to stitch them together. It's the same negative debate the happened with LPS, etc. I think Dan got sick and tired of explaining what he did, of defending a multi-exposure photo, and how any photoshop adjusted (any photoshop -- levels, saturation, curves, etc.) photo is just as real as a SOC photo.
So… find yourself a cold, clear night, take him up on the offer of the D3 and get yourself a big, crisp, beautiful pano!
Dan probably won’t answer that question anymore, but you might ask him if/when you see him in person. From my chats with him, Nature’s Night Light is a [url=http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=88013
] multi-exposure photo taken on March 2008[/url] in the middle of the night on an amazing clear night with puffy clouds in the hills of Oakland, CA. He was trying to capture the image that he saw that night on the way home from long day at work – the city below puffy clouds with the moon above the clouds. So... he broke into the backyard of his old house, set up his tripod and attempted to capture what he saw.
And this very photo nearly made him quit photography.
To his surprise, he made the front page of Digg and had over 22,000 views on flickr, but the attention also brought numerous critical people who questioned and attacked him on the authenticity of photo since they believed that “real” photos are the ones that are “straight of camera” – these beautiful panos that you're trying to create would be considered “fake” by their definitions since they are not SOC and used a program to stitch them together. It's the same negative debate the happened with LPS, etc. I think Dan got sick and tired of explaining what he did, of defending a multi-exposure photo, and how any photoshop adjusted (any photoshop -- levels, saturation, curves, etc.) photo is just as real as a SOC photo.
So… find yourself a cold, clear night, take him up on the offer of the D3 and get yourself a big, crisp, beautiful pano!
Wow, that's some great history! Dan was extremely gracious and met me on the way to Montclair to lend me his D3 and lenses. I asked him about the photo and he gave me the short story but I could tell it was sensitive.
A guy from our office said, "I knew it was a fake as soon as I saw the moon and how big it was. He put it there. No way the moon is that big above SF." Ironically, when I got to Montclair the moon was low over the horizon and huge. I shot it and will have to compare moon sizes, but I think mine was bigger, right off the camera.
I used to work at an online bookstore for geeks called Fatbrain.com. We got the idea to let people submit their own reviews of books, and we let them pick a star rating. I didn't expect the torrent of pressure from publishers to stop doing it. "Anybody on the Internet can trash a great book."
Four months later Amazon followed suit and the publishers got pissed at them too. But then Jeff showed them something interesting, which is books that got 4-star ratings didn't sell. Books that got a combination of 5 & 1-star ratings sold like crazy. "Proving yet again," he said, "the only real problem in life is to be ignored."
BaldyRegistered Users, Super ModeratorsPosts: 2,853moderator
edited September 10, 2008
Hey Ziggy,
Am I missing something or when I use mirror-up mode on the D3 and want to bracket three shots, I'm tripping the shutter 6 times for one frame? What I'd like is to flip the mirror, take the 3 bracketed shots, mirror back down, next position.
Am I missing something or when I use mirror-up mode on the D3 and want to bracket three shots, I'm tripping the shutter 6 times for one frame? What I'd like is to flip the mirror, take the 3 bracketed shots, mirror back down, next position.
It's not too big a deal, but thought I'd ask.
I think HarryB is our resident expert on the D3. I'll see if he can stop in to this thread.
Am I missing something or when I use mirror-up mode on the D3 and want to bracket three shots, I'm tripping the shutter 6 times for one frame? What I'd like is to flip the mirror, take the 3 bracketed shots, mirror back down, next position.
It's not too big a deal, but thought I'd ask.
Unfortunately you will not be able to do that on the D3. One click to lift mirror, one click to take the picture. 2 clicks for every shot.
I would try to use in combination, mirror-up plus exposure delay mode. It gives the camera a 4/10ths of a sec before firing the shutter once depressed.
This function is in the custom setting menu ~ shooting/display ~ d8 Exposure delay mode.
I know I do not have to say this but just to satisfy my paranoia, please use the electronic release when using these functions.
As the great Ansel Adams said, "No man has the right to dictate what other men should perceive, create or produce, but all should be encouraged to reveal themselves, their perceptions and emotions, and to build confidence in the creative spirit." as well as , "You don't take a photograph, you make it."
I would try to use in combination, mirror-up plus exposure delay mode. It gives the camera a 4/10ths of a sec before firing the shutter once depressed.
This function is in the custom setting menu ~ shooting/display ~ d8 Exposure delay mode.
I know I do not have to say this but just to satisfy my paranoia, please use the electronic release when using these functions.
Its actually similar with Canon bodies. With the delay timer on the camera lifts the mirror, waits 2 seconds, takes the shot and then drops the mirror all from one click. For bracket that at least gets you down to 3 clicks rather than 6.
Canon also sells an extrnal timing unit, the TC-80N which you can program to take 3 shots with, say, a 5 second gap. Using the TC-80N I can shoot an entire bracket with one click. The mirror still flips 3 times, but at least it is automated. Is there something similar in the Nikon world?
Its actually similar with Canon bodies. With the delay timer on the camera lifts the mirror, waits 2 seconds, takes the shot and then drops the mirror all from one click. For bracket that at least gets you down to 3 clicks rather than 6.
Canon also sells an extrnal timing unit, the TC-80N which you can program to take 3 shots with, say, a 5 second gap. Using the TC-80N I can shoot an entire bracket with one click. The mirror still flips 3 times, but at least it is automated. Is there something similar in the Nikon world?
yet another prime example of dgrins help to the masses ....
i never knew this until now....i have this trigger and have been using it in manual mode because im an idiot.....thanks LQair now i have a self teaching lesson this weekend to master....
yet another prime example of dgrins help to the masses ....
i never knew this until now....i have this trigger and have been using it in manual mode because im an idiot.....thanks LQair now i have a self teaching lesson this weekend to master....
When i have the chance I would like to try multiple exposure mode within the camera and see if the mirror stays up or stays down after the first exposure.
this would help with noise levels, shorten the time the shutter is open and it would clean up some of the ghosting in long exposures. At least that is what i read but I have never actually tried it myself. Now my curiosity is screaming
When i have the chance I would like to try multiple exposure mode within the camera and see if the mirror stays up or stays down after the first exposure.
this would help with noise levels, shorten the time the shutter is open and it would clean up some of the ghosting in long exposures. At least that is what i read but I have never actually tried it myself. Now my curiosity is screaming
so if you can imagine me using my t/s lens doing three bracketed shots per shifted frame you see my excitment in this too....
yet another prime example of dgrins help to the masses ....
i never knew this until now....i have this trigger and have been using it in manual mode because im an idiot.....thanks LQair now i have a self teaching lesson this weekend to master....
Here's my full setup for shooting HDRs:
ISO 100 to 400
Aperture Priority f/10, which on full frame is my preferred balance between sharpness and DoF. On 1.6 crop you probably want f/8 or maybe f/7.1
Metering: Center weighted average. This I find gives me the best bet at picking up both the shadows and the highlights with the bracket.
Auto-Bracket: +/- 2 stops.
Delay Timer and MLU on.
WB: Daylight. This is to give me a predictable histogram. Since I shoot RAW, I'll be correcting the WB later anyhow so the camera mode is only about what I see on the LCD.
TC-80N: 3 exposures, 3-30 seconds delay.
During the daytime a 3 second delay is sufficient, but as the sun goes down the exposures get long and a longer and a longer delay is required.
One the 5D, I use the "Custom" setting for HDRs and flip the mode dial over to M for other shooting.
Aperture Priority f/10, which on full frame is my preferred balance between sharpness and DoF. On 1.6 crop you probably want f/8 or maybe f/7.1
Metering: Center weighted average. This I find gives me the best bet at picking up both the shadows and the highlights with the bracket.
Auto-Bracket: +/- 2 stops.
Delay Timer and MLU on.
WB: Daylight. This is to give me a predictable histogram. Since I shoot RAW, I'll be correcting the WB later anyhow so the camera mode is only about what I see on the LCD.
TC-80N: 3 exposures, 3-30 seconds delay.
During the daytime a 3 second delay is sufficient, but as the sun goes down the exposures get long and a longer and a longer delay is required.
One the 5D, I use the "Custom" setting for HDRs and flip the mode dial over to M for other shooting.
Great stuff. I'm in total sponge mode here.
I fetched the manual online but youz know more than it tells.
One question is I don't see how to bracket more than 1 stop per shot? That puts me shooting 5 frames to get 3 at +/- two stops. The concern is time to get the nightscape.
Second Q is I'm kinda getting the bug to try my hand at a more artsy HDRish version, but I'm seeing a pretty big dose of noise. I snapped this with the D3 at ISO 400, using 3 frames at +/- 2 stops with Photomatix.
One question is I don't see how to bracket more than 1 stop per shot? That puts me shooting 5 frames to get 3 at +/- two stops. The concern is time to get the nightscape.
I have not used a D3; my experience is with the 5D where the bracket step can be adjusted in 1/3 stop increments up to 2 stops.
Does it look like maybe I should have tried it with +/- 3 stops, or do I suck at using Photomatix?
Part of your problem seems to be that some of the boats moved a bit between frames, but I doubt that is the source of the noise. Take a look at the noise level in the brighest image in your bracket; that's the one which should determine your shadow noise. If anything in your merged image is noiser than that, there is something wrong. I haven't used Photomatrix so I don't know what to expect there. I've done most of my HDRs with Photoshop which requires more tweaking, but they come out clean as a whistle.
If you do need more dynamic range, I'd take more exposures. The way I do it is to first set the EC to +2 and bracket and then set the EC to -2 and bracket. That gives me 5 frames 2 stops apart with a duplicate in the center of the range. Not an optimal use of memory, but its quick.
I've notied in my photomatix hdr merges that I can get a lot of noise in the solid colour areas and that's even shooting at lower ISO (100 and 200 on a Nikon D80).
I don't think the original RAWs were all that noisy.
I'm doing it very simple - just -2/0/+2 then merge full auto in photomatix and then a simple tone map - nothing extreme.
The result is what I want to work on in LR2.0 but yeah it's got significant noise in it -and not necessarily in the areas/objects that were moving.
Love to know if it's a setting or something I'm doing wrong in taking/processing the images.
Hi Baldy, Give PTGui Pro a go for stitching huge HDR Pano's, it handles some seriously large image sizes, will export to blended layers, 32bit .hdr's or even has tone mapping within the software.
Here's a 360 from a couple of weeks ago (from the top of a ski field in New Zealand)
72 images @ 40mm (bracketed) blended and tone mapped in ptgui :
Hi Baldy, Give PTGui Pro a go for stitching huge HDR Pano's, it handles some seriously large image sizes, will export to blended layers, 32bit .hdr's or even has tone mapping within the software.
Here's a 360 from a couple of weeks ago (from the top of a ski field in New Zealand)
72 images @ 40mm (bracketed) blended and tone mapped in ptgui :
BaldyRegistered Users, Super ModeratorsPosts: 2,853moderator
edited September 13, 2008
Okay, I know this isn't the HDR thread, but I've been practicing up with the D3 so I can make another run at the SF pano more HDR-like this time. So here's some snaps from Stanford tonight with various tone maps:
Have you thought about trying to shoot it just after some rain? You may find that will stir up the layers of heat more then on a still clear night. I've only had a chance to shoot in San Fran once when I was there for work. (shooting a tv commercial) We were escorted to the the top of the Embarcadero building (the lift only takes you so far, we had 3 floors of ladders to climb to get to the roof) and I had a chance to shoot this Pano of 27 photos.
What a fun city, I can see why you want a huge print of the skyline.
Thinking about huge prints which look tack-sharp, it's interesting to revisit a master from an older time, Brad Washburn. Here is a good place to start. And another.
He used a large format aerial camera and sometimes shot from airplanes, sometimes from the ground. I used to work a few steps away from his gallery, Panopticon, in Waltham, MA (both Panopticon and I have moved on...) They often displayed 64" x whatever prints of his shots and they were really spectacular. These were digital prints from negative scans.
I have a large Washburn which shows Boston in 1938 from the air. It's the second shot, third row here. Very cool.
Anyway, I know it isn't that helpful in terms of technique, but I hope it will introduce some to Brad's work.
If not now, when?
0
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited September 15, 2008
Great image Baldy
Bradford Washburn inspired me with his 8x10 aerials of Alaska, I think rutt is onto something. Maybe shoot a pano with a 8x10 loaded with Fuji Velvia film I really like this thread and find sharpness in all digital work illusive, as there are so many factors. I recall some of my sharpest appearing images were taken on Kodak Tri-X black and white nagative film. Not the smallest grain in the world but wow were those granules sharp.
Just in case you have not tried, have you sharpened the files in LAB on the luminance channel?
This always looks the best IMO
Bradford Washburn inspired me with his 8x10 aerials of Alaska, I think rutt is onto something.
I think the National Geographic article from a few years back was a huge influence for me visiting Alaska. You see that most of his aerials are shot hanging out of the plane in a thermal suit holding a camera that must have weighed a lot.
Though grand in scale, his shots were compelling and captured a great deal of detail.
Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
0
BaldyRegistered Users, Super ModeratorsPosts: 2,853moderator
I recall some of my sharpest appearing images were taken on Kodak Tri-X black and white nagative film.
That's fascinating, Marc. I went back to SF a few nights ago with the D3 set to ISO 400 and this time I bracketed each shot +/- 2 stops. When I got home I looked at the brightest ones closely, got discouraged by the lack of sharpness, and figured it must've been "one of those nights". It made me wonder if I'd ever get the shot and whether I'd need the patience and expertise of a Muench.
Sam has a 4x5 camera, but a pro I met at Keeble & Schuchat said she'd tried to shoot the panorama I'm trying to shoot many times with a 4x5 and concluded that she just couldn't get the camera to stay still enough with the always-present wind, so she finally gave up.
Interestingly, we watched Planet Earth a few nights later and noticed that with the amazing zooms they must have used, even on cold mornings there were thermal waves when the zoom was long (but not as pronounced as on warm days).
So I went back to the D3 shots I took the other night and looked more critically at sharpness. Sure enough, the -2 stop shots are a lot sharper than at 0, and that much more sharp again than at +2. As a matter of fact, at the same shutter speed, the Nikon shots are about the same sharpness as the ISO 400 shots we took with the 1Ds the other night.
My machine is bogging at the moment stitching, but when it's done I'll post examples.
I also notice that when I'm higher on the Island, a few hundred feet above the water, they seem to be sharper still at the same settings.
So, I'm thinking the 4x5 photographer must've been using a slow shutter speed due to low ISO and a maybe a stop like 8.0 and gotten pwned by thermals.
This also explains why when we shot with the Hasselblad at ISO 50 and f/8, the images were nowhere near as sharp as with the 1Ds MKIII at ISO 400 and f/4. I thought the Hasselblad sucked for night shots, but I was getting unbelievably great images with it in the day at ISO 50.
I'm thinking of going back with the D3 jacked to ISO 1000 or 1200, which it seems to be able to handle, the 500mm f/4 prime, and shoot a two-row pano in portrait mode. That's gonna give me a pretty good shutter speed.
I'll shoot one down by the water and one a few hundred feet higher on the island where (a) it's less windy and (b) maybe I don't have to shoot across so much water down by the surface where thermals probaly are most pronounced.
Comments
Dan probably won’t answer that question anymore, but you might ask him if/when you see him in person. From my chats with him, Nature’s Night Light is a [url=http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=88013
] multi-exposure photo taken on March 2008[/url] in the middle of the night on an amazing clear night with puffy clouds in the hills of Oakland, CA. He was trying to capture the image that he saw that night on the way home from long day at work – the city below puffy clouds with the moon above the clouds. So... he broke into the backyard of his old house, set up his tripod and attempted to capture what he saw.
And this very photo nearly made him quit photography.
To his surprise, he made the front page of Digg and had over 22,000 views on flickr, but the attention also brought numerous critical people who questioned and attacked him on the authenticity of photo since they believed that “real” photos are the ones that are “straight of camera” – these beautiful panos that you're trying to create would be considered “fake” by their definitions since they are not SOC and used a program to stitch them together. It's the same negative debate the happened with LPS, etc. I think Dan got sick and tired of explaining what he did, of defending a multi-exposure photo, and how any photoshop adjusted (any photoshop -- levels, saturation, curves, etc.) photo is just as real as a SOC photo.
So… find yourself a cold, clear night, take him up on the offer of the D3 and get yourself a big, crisp, beautiful pano!
That software Autopano Pro looks absolutely amazing, and I'll be trying the demo over next weekend.
What a great thread, lots to learn here! Most of all, I can't wait to see when it's all done! Oh the joys of living in the valley : )
-J
A guy from our office said, "I knew it was a fake as soon as I saw the moon and how big it was. He put it there. No way the moon is that big above SF." Ironically, when I got to Montclair the moon was low over the horizon and huge. I shot it and will have to compare moon sizes, but I think mine was bigger, right off the camera.
I used to work at an online bookstore for geeks called Fatbrain.com. We got the idea to let people submit their own reviews of books, and we let them pick a star rating. I didn't expect the torrent of pressure from publishers to stop doing it. "Anybody on the Internet can trash a great book."
Four months later Amazon followed suit and the publishers got pissed at them too. But then Jeff showed them something interesting, which is books that got 4-star ratings didn't sell. Books that got a combination of 5 & 1-star ratings sold like crazy. "Proving yet again," he said, "the only real problem in life is to be ignored."
Sounds like Daniel's photo is a 5 & 1-star photo.
Am I missing something or when I use mirror-up mode on the D3 and want to bracket three shots, I'm tripping the shutter 6 times for one frame? What I'd like is to flip the mirror, take the 3 bracketed shots, mirror back down, next position.
It's not too big a deal, but thought I'd ask.
I think HarryB is our resident expert on the D3. I'll see if he can stop in to this thread.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Unfortunately you will not be able to do that on the D3. One click to lift mirror, one click to take the picture. 2 clicks for every shot.
I would try to use in combination, mirror-up plus exposure delay mode. It gives the camera a 4/10ths of a sec before firing the shutter once depressed.
This function is in the custom setting menu ~ shooting/display ~ d8 Exposure delay mode.
I know I do not have to say this but just to satisfy my paranoia, please use the electronic release when using these functions.
My Photo Blog -->http://dthorpphoto.blogspot.com/
:lol4
That is a great rating and story. Thanks.
As the great Ansel Adams said, "No man has the right to dictate what other men should perceive, create or produce, but all should be encouraged to reveal themselves, their perceptions and emotions, and to build confidence in the creative spirit." as well as , "You don't take a photograph, you make it."
My Photo Blog -->http://dthorpphoto.blogspot.com/
Its actually similar with Canon bodies. With the delay timer on the camera lifts the mirror, waits 2 seconds, takes the shot and then drops the mirror all from one click. For bracket that at least gets you down to 3 clicks rather than 6.
Canon also sells an extrnal timing unit, the TC-80N which you can program to take 3 shots with, say, a 5 second gap. Using the TC-80N I can shoot an entire bracket with one click. The mirror still flips 3 times, but at least it is automated. Is there something similar in the Nikon world?
yet another prime example of dgrins help to the masses ....
i never knew this until now....i have this trigger and have been using it in manual mode because im an idiot.....thanks LQair now i have a self teaching lesson this weekend to master....
When i have the chance I would like to try multiple exposure mode within the camera and see if the mirror stays up or stays down after the first exposure.
this would help with noise levels, shorten the time the shutter is open and it would clean up some of the ghosting in long exposures. At least that is what i read but I have never actually tried it myself. Now my curiosity is screaming
My Photo Blog -->http://dthorpphoto.blogspot.com/
so if you can imagine me using my t/s lens doing three bracketed shots per shifted frame you see my excitment in this too....
Here's my full setup for shooting HDRs:
ISO 100 to 400
Aperture Priority f/10, which on full frame is my preferred balance between sharpness and DoF. On 1.6 crop you probably want f/8 or maybe f/7.1
Metering: Center weighted average. This I find gives me the best bet at picking up both the shadows and the highlights with the bracket.
Auto-Bracket: +/- 2 stops.
Delay Timer and MLU on.
WB: Daylight. This is to give me a predictable histogram. Since I shoot RAW, I'll be correcting the WB later anyhow so the camera mode is only about what I see on the LCD.
TC-80N: 3 exposures, 3-30 seconds delay.
During the daytime a 3 second delay is sufficient, but as the sun goes down the exposures get long and a longer and a longer delay is required.
One the 5D, I use the "Custom" setting for HDRs and flip the mode dial over to M for other shooting.
Feel free to start a new thread in this forum. I love this tangential discussion.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
i have one.
I fetched the manual online but youz know more than it tells.
One question is I don't see how to bracket more than 1 stop per shot? That puts me shooting 5 frames to get 3 at +/- two stops. The concern is time to get the nightscape.
Second Q is I'm kinda getting the bug to try my hand at a more artsy HDRish version, but I'm seeing a pretty big dose of noise. I snapped this with the D3 at ISO 400, using 3 frames at +/- 2 stops with Photomatix.
I have not used a D3; my experience is with the 5D where the bracket step can be adjusted in 1/3 stop increments up to 2 stops.
Part of your problem seems to be that some of the boats moved a bit between frames, but I doubt that is the source of the noise. Take a look at the noise level in the brighest image in your bracket; that's the one which should determine your shadow noise. If anything in your merged image is noiser than that, there is something wrong. I haven't used Photomatrix so I don't know what to expect there. I've done most of my HDRs with Photoshop which requires more tweaking, but they come out clean as a whistle.
If you do need more dynamic range, I'd take more exposures. The way I do it is to first set the EC to +2 and bracket and then set the EC to -2 and bracket. That gives me 5 frames 2 stops apart with a duplicate in the center of the range. Not an optimal use of memory, but its quick.
I've notied in my photomatix hdr merges that I can get a lot of noise in the solid colour areas and that's even shooting at lower ISO (100 and 200 on a Nikon D80).
I don't think the original RAWs were all that noisy.
I'm doing it very simple - just -2/0/+2 then merge full auto in photomatix and then a simple tone map - nothing extreme.
The result is what I want to work on in LR2.0 but yeah it's got significant noise in it -and not necessarily in the areas/objects that were moving.
Love to know if it's a setting or something I'm doing wrong in taking/processing the images.
Cheers,
Jase
Jase // www.stonesque.com
How do the individual frames look?
I drove past Stanford tonight and snapped a few at ISO 200 and they were clean too evan after Photomatix:
Any how, have you tried making an HDR shot from a single frame? Not as good as multiples but might help with the movement.
Here's a 360 from a couple of weeks ago (from the top of a ski field in New Zealand)
72 images @ 40mm (bracketed) blended and tone mapped in ptgui :
and one with a wider lens (24mm)
Looks like they'd print big ever so well...
Have you thought about trying to shoot it just after some rain? You may find that will stir up the layers of heat more then on a still clear night. I've only had a chance to shoot in San Fran once when I was there for work. (shooting a tv commercial) We were escorted to the the top of the Embarcadero building (the lift only takes you so far, we had 3 floors of ladders to climb to get to the roof) and I had a chance to shoot this Pano of 27 photos.
What a fun city, I can see why you want a huge print of the skyline.
And another.
He used a large format aerial camera and sometimes shot from airplanes, sometimes from the ground. I used to work a few steps away from his gallery, Panopticon, in Waltham, MA (both Panopticon and I have moved on...) They often displayed 64" x whatever prints of his shots and they were really spectacular. These were digital prints from negative scans.
I have a large Washburn which shows Boston in 1938 from the air. It's the second shot, third row here. Very cool.
Anyway, I know it isn't that helpful in terms of technique, but I hope it will introduce some to Brad's work.
Great image Baldy
Bradford Washburn inspired me with his 8x10 aerials of Alaska, I think rutt is onto something. Maybe shoot a pano with a 8x10 loaded with Fuji Velvia film
Just in case you have not tried, have you sharpened the files in LAB on the luminance channel?
This always looks the best IMO
I am sure you will get it right
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
I think the National Geographic article from a few years back was a huge influence for me visiting Alaska. You see that most of his aerials are shot hanging out of the plane in a thermal suit holding a camera that must have weighed a lot.
Though grand in scale, his shots were compelling and captured a great deal of detail.
Sam has a 4x5 camera, but a pro I met at Keeble & Schuchat said she'd tried to shoot the panorama I'm trying to shoot many times with a 4x5 and concluded that she just couldn't get the camera to stay still enough with the always-present wind, so she finally gave up.
Interestingly, we watched Planet Earth a few nights later and noticed that with the amazing zooms they must have used, even on cold mornings there were thermal waves when the zoom was long (but not as pronounced as on warm days).
So I went back to the D3 shots I took the other night and looked more critically at sharpness. Sure enough, the -2 stop shots are a lot sharper than at 0, and that much more sharp again than at +2. As a matter of fact, at the same shutter speed, the Nikon shots are about the same sharpness as the ISO 400 shots we took with the 1Ds the other night.
My machine is bogging at the moment stitching, but when it's done I'll post examples.
I also notice that when I'm higher on the Island, a few hundred feet above the water, they seem to be sharper still at the same settings.
So, I'm thinking the 4x5 photographer must've been using a slow shutter speed due to low ISO and a maybe a stop like 8.0 and gotten pwned by thermals.
This also explains why when we shot with the Hasselblad at ISO 50 and f/8, the images were nowhere near as sharp as with the 1Ds MKIII at ISO 400 and f/4. I thought the Hasselblad sucked for night shots, but I was getting unbelievably great images with it in the day at ISO 50.
I'm thinking of going back with the D3 jacked to ISO 1000 or 1200, which it seems to be able to handle, the 500mm f/4 prime, and shoot a two-row pano in portrait mode. That's gonna give me a pretty good shutter speed.
I'll shoot one down by the water and one a few hundred feet higher on the island where (a) it's less windy and (b) maybe I don't have to shoot across so much water down by the surface where thermals probaly are most pronounced.
Sound like a plan?