How to get this shot

ThatCanonGuy

We've all seen these... like this one on Baldy's site:
http://cmac.smugmug.com/popular/747663538_fhCsz#747663538_fhCsz

I was hoping to do something similar in 8 days. I'm wondered how exactly. I guess you could take a shot before the sun goes down, then take the firework shot and run some HDR? Seems like it would be pretty hard to insert the fireworks.

How I'm assuming it's done: Long exposure, like 5 minutes. I've seen Peter Lik do this, he'll do it in the middle of the night and it looks like daytime in the final image. But... there'd be so many fireworks during that 5 minutes, that they'd be blown out. Maybe this fireworks show was in the daytime? Having it in the daytime doesn't make much sense either.

Also... would the image from my 1D2 be too noisy? It doesn't have great ISO performance. I can use 800 easily, but there's a bit of noise. I will only go to 1250 if I have to. Maybe some NR would be needed?

Appreciate any help

pathfinder

I assume you mean the image by Trey Radcliffe?

The foreground exposure is long ( of course ), and the fireworks are captured while the shutter remains open during that long exposure. THis may have all been done is one exposure, or it may have been a series of exposures, as HDR is what Trey does a lot of. I would guess the exposure is more on the order of 10- 30 seconds.

This is one of mine ( no where near as scenic as Trey's ) shot at ISO 100, f10, 5 seconds, with a 5D. With the higher ISOs of more modern DSLRs, you should be able to capture the foreground with exposures under 20 or 30 seconds with apertures of f5.6 or f8 I would think. This is a single frame, not an HDR or a composite image.

ThatCanonGuy

Yes, I meant Trey's.

I'm trying to figure out how to get the dark foreground light without blowing out the fireworks. The fireworks should help... I'll have to do some test shots first.

Looking closely at Trey's, I can see some HDR effects in the clouds... or maybe that's just motion blur. There is some haloing around the fireworks, more evidence of this being HDR.

pathfinder

Or it may have been done in software like Topaz Adjust, too.

I can get nice HDR-ish looks with some images with Topaz Adjust. I was able to get this much shadow detail out of my 8 bit file I posted above with a pass through Topaz Adjust. Raw files processed through Photomatic to a faux-HDR can do even better with their greater amount of image data.

DavidTO

I don't understand the popularity of that image.

pathfinder

This one you mean, David?

http://stuckincustoms.smugmug.com/Portfolio-The-Best/your-favorites/10668747_AuyBk#742619193_SacSS-XL-LB

I don't think that is one of Trey's better images either. But as I have said previously, I think the general public ( or maybe publishing editors also ) like HDR images much better than many photograpehrs who grew up with the contrast levels of film.

If one looks carefully in modern newspapers, and magazines, HDR type images are everywhere. They are so common most folks do not even recognize them I think.

In my Popular Images section, in my Smugmug gallery, HDR type images are present in a much higher percentage than I shoot or save them; they are strongly over represented on a percentage basis, so some of my viewers do seem to like them.

Or were you just referring to my fireworks image, David?

DavidTO

pathfinder wrote: »

This one you mean, David?

Yes, that one. Yours is fine, PF! (And I daresay, not nearly as popular!)

Anyway, to me that's the worst of HDR. Trey has some nice images, but so many of them are so overcooked, and this one especially. It's far from natural and far from pleasant to look at, IMO. If it's not one, then perhaps it should be the other.