I used multiple exposures for the foreground in the same fashion that a real estate photographer would when popping flashes on the outside of a house. I put a CTO balloon, (at least one that provides the color close enough to what i want), over my flash and just started popping while my intervalometer was taking multiple images. I ended up only using two foreground images. I got one flash pop nicely on the rocks and another on the tree. The Milky Way was tracked.
I'm on the fence of whether it's too saturated or bright. CC welcome.
If you are concerned about the foreground being too saturated or too bright, does it matter? There is rarely anything at all realistic about MW images so you need not worry about that issue. This has a lot of pop to it. Isn't that the point?
Thats a wonderful MW image, RYAN. The lighting on the foreground is nice and subtle, and I especially love how you've rendered the color temperature rather realistically instead of rendering the milky way completely bluish.
Just one suggestion, you might want to reduce the tonality [contrast and sharpness both] in the milky way part.
I'm only looking at the current version and it looks great! Congratulations!
I like that the Milkyway is not hyped to absurdity, which seems so common on IG these days. I like that you are taking advantage of what the camera can "see" (capture) but not pushing it into the stratosphere and showing restraint in the development and vision of the image. I like that balance.
stanparker wrote:
Looks good to me, but consider the source: I've never done MW so only know what I like.
Thank you.
---------------------------------------------
Camperjim wrote:
If you are concerned about the foreground being too saturated or too bright, does it matter? There is rarely anything at all realistic about MW images so you need not worry about that issue. This has a lot of pop to it. Isn't that the point?
Lol...I say the same things to people sometimes. I did lower the saturation slider on the foreground about 15 points and reduced exposure by 1/3rd stop. Thanks for the feedback.
---------------------------------------------
twoflower wrote:
Thats a wonderful MW image, RYAN. The lighting on the foreground is nice and subtle, and I especially love how you've rendered the color temperature rather realistically instead of rendering the milky way completely bluish.
Just one suggestion, you might want to reduce the tonality [contrast and sharpness both] in the milky way part.
Interesting...like an "Orton" effect on the MW portion?
---------------------------------------------
JR Photo wrote:
Well I like it. But does it fit your vision? You say that you have played around with and are still on the fence.
J. R.
I ask a question and this guy responds with a question...lol...I like it. Simple and thought provoking. Is it what I envisioned in creating, yes, but I did let the Instagram saturation game influence me a bit too hard, so I toned it down.
---------------------------------------------
Mark Metternich wrote:
I'm only looking at the current version and it looks great! Congratulations!
I like that the Milkyway is not hyped to absurdity, which seems so common on IG these days. I like that you are taking advantage of what the camera can "see" (capture) but not pushing it into the stratosphere and showing restraint in the development and vision of the image. I like that balance.
Thanks for your feedback Mark. I did reduce the exposure by 1/3rd of a stop and the saturation about 15 points. I'm a big fan of nightscape exposure realism with darks and shadows, and glad I'm not the only one.
Outstanding capture, Ryan! You have managed to beautifully balance the foreground and night sky with the right colors.
Trying to understand how you lit the foreground. When you say flash, is that a speedlight that you were triggering using the test button? Or just a regular flashlight that you covered with a CTO gel?
Warkari wrote:
Outstanding capture, Ryan! You have managed to beautifully balance the foreground and night sky with the right colors.
Trying to understand how you lit the foreground. When you say flash, is that a speedlight that you were triggering using the test button? Or just a regular flashlight that you covered with a CTO gel?
Amit
Thanks. I used a Canon 580EX II speedlight on manual power and walked around pushing the "Test" button. I used a balloon that I cut the top off of and pulled the remainder of it over the speedlight to act as a gel. I have a couple of CTO gels that I was never really happy with. They created more of a yellow cast rather than a campfire orange glow. I did also do some minor tweaking with a Hue/Saturation adjustment to dial in what I think is that perfect campfire glow to the light, but it wasn't much.
JR Photo wrote:
Well I like it. But does it fit your vision? You say that you have played around with and are still on the fence.
J. R.
I ask a question and this guy responds with a question...lol...I like it. Simple and thought provoking. Is it what I envisioned in creating, yes, but I did let the Instagram saturation game influence me a bit too hard, so I toned it down.
So you answered your own question. In the dark of the night that is what I ultimately come to! Good job!
