Some Urban Night Shots (Canon, Nikon, PowerShot, d30)

[rosecitywanderer]

It was a fairly dry and nice night on Saturday so I went out and shot some pictures around the city. I started with the intersection of SE 12th Avenue, SE Sandy Boulevard and E Burnside Street, an extremely complicated 9-way intersection that is due to be rebuilt in the near future. I decided that it would be wise to capture its old world complexity before it's gone for good.

For some reason I had the hardest time getting my camera to focus correctly. It was truly annoying. These were taken with a Canon PowerShot SD790IS on the 10 megapixel setting. I used a variety of exposure levels and long-exposure times. Some of the quality has been lost in the compression. Sorry.

I appreciate any feedback and comments, be it positive or negative.





The river was almost glass-smooth so I drove a few blocks down to the waterfront and walked out onto an open dock that essentially sits two inches off the water. There are no railings so I had to be very careful where I put my feet. Here is a picture of downtown from the water line.


The Hawthorne Bridge, circa 1912 was completely rehabilitated in 1998.


The Marquam Bridge carrying I-5 over the Willamette River. It's really a pretty ugly bridge...and yes I know the picture is slightly out of focus. The light was very minimal and the camera struggled with focus as a result. The Ross Island Bridge is behind it in the distance.


Higher up on the embankment offered a wider view of downtown.


Here's a stub ramp to feed a freeway expansion that never happened.


Thanks for looking. I plan on shooting some more very soon.

[mathjak107]

a few comments.

tooooo soft and almost blury on most , dosnt look like a tripod was used which is mandatory for night shooting unless you have great low light ability in your camera which you dont unfourtunetly .i found the glare from various lights to distracting on the first few and wasnt quite sure where i was supposed to be focusing on as far as your focus or center of attraction..

the bottom batch was to dark and lacked the fine details that make night time shooting look so nice. a lot was lost in the shadows.... to me its the clean sharp lines of the scenes that make night time shooting look so nice and when handholding you get none of that. you kind of end up with just snap shots instead of the beautiful detailing of the city and skyline at night.

its as if all my attention just went to the light bulbs instead of the scene

the reflections in the water should be crisp and well difined..

you should get a tripod and try it again, id love to see the difference. the one next to the last would look fabulous clean , well lite in exposure , razor sharp and with nice sharp reflections in the water... same with the bridge shot.

sometimes ill bring up the structures in brightness and contrast to get them far beyond the lights illuminating them so the building details come out instead of just the light bulbs . the sky was as dark as midnight and the bulbs overwhelmed the buildings . nikon d300 with 17-55mm f2.8 on a tripod.the green trees had spotlights on them furthur complicating the issues.

[Old Man Winter]

I applaud your effort. After looking at these, and mind you im no proffessional photographer, it would be logical that the long exposure times were the issue. Hand held with long exposure is a recipe for blur. I do agree with Math that the first few were very difficult to find a subject to focus on as I was drawn to the harshness of the streetlights. I would love to see the shots from across the river redone with shorter exposure times, even hand held you should be fine. And we all need to remember on this forum, this is not a proffessional photography forum, so post editing options for many if not most will be limited to null. I think you did great, and it should serve as a good learning experience to go back to the same spot and try different settings to get improved results. I look forward to seeing the new shots when you go back.

[mathjak107]

you may even want to try bracketing a few different exposures on a tripod and then pick the best of the lot.

spotmetering off a subject helps too at night as at least the subject may come out with a decent exposure although everything around may be lost.

[rosecitywanderer]

That's the funny thing...I was using a tri-pod. I even went to such lengths as putting on a 2-second self timer so when the shutter released I was not touching the camera. I've never had issues before but I do think the long-exposure times had something to do with it. Also, it was getting kind of cold as the night wore on so I decided to call it quits. Regardless, I do appreciate the input.

I have a list of new sites that I want to shoot so I'll dink around with the camera settings to see if I can get it looking better.

[mathjak107]

what iso were you using? it sure looks like motion blurr but maybe the auto iso was on and you were at some ridiculios number that turned everything soft. or you could be just plain old under exposed as the photos are way to dark so maybe your camera just goes soft when the lighte drops to below a certain point.

[jm31828]

Originally Posted by mathjak107

a few comments.

tooooo soft and almost blury on most , dosnt look like a tripod was used which is mandatory for night shooting unless you have great low light ability in your camera which you dont unfourtunetly .i found the glare from various lights to distracting on the first few and wasnt quite sure where i was supposed to be focusing on as far as your focus or center of attraction..

the bottom batch was to dark and lacked the fine details that make night time shooting look so nice. a lot was lost in the shadows.... to me its the clean sharp lines of the scenes that make night time shooting look so nice and when handholding you get none of that. you kind of end up with just snap shots instead of the beautiful detailing of the city and skyline at night.

its as if all my attention just went to the light bulbs instead of the scene

the reflections in the water should be crisp and well difined..

you should get a tripod and try it again, id love to see the difference. the one next to the last would look fabulous clean , well lite in exposure , razor sharp and with nice sharp reflections in the water... same with the bridge shot.

sometimes ill bring up the structures in brightness and contrast to get them far beyond the lights illuminating them so the building details come out instead of just the light bulbs . the sky was as dark as midnight and the bulbs overwhelmed the buildings . nikon d300 with 17-55mm f2.8 on a tripod.the green trees had spotlights on them furthur complicating the issues.

Your shot is really cool regardless- I like how the buildings stand out almost as if they are separate from the sky that is behind them- like they were photoshopped in. :-) The colors came out great, in my unprofessional opinion.

I played around for the first time this weekend with time lapse photography as the sun had set in downtown Seattle- one of those pics is attached. I am amazed at how rich some of the colors can be in time lapse! It makes me excited to get back out there and try more, that's for sure.

Anyway, to the original poster- as was noted by others and from my experience with this pic, a tripod is a must with night shots- you'll get amazing shots that way. As it is yours turned out great with very little blur- I am impressed, you must be very steady with the camera.

[mathjak107]

nice shot... id like to see more detail in the ground area by adding more exposure but your on the right track.... a histogram is good to use at night, it helps judge the exposure better so you dont under expose......

i always shoot as far to the right as i can giving myself as much light as possible, even blowing out whats not important... otherwise your metering system will work off those bright bulbs and under expose the rest of the photo.

the buildings in my photo were merley spot brightened and contrasted elevating them from the surroundings as well as the sky too..... i guess you call it light inversions or dodging and burning

[rosecitywanderer]

Originally Posted by mathjak107

what iso were you using? it sure looks like motion blurr but maybe the auto iso was on and you were at some ridiculios number that turned everything soft. or you could be just plain old under exposed as the photos are way to dark so maybe your camera just goes soft when the lighte drops to below a certain point.

I think you might have hit the nail on the head with this. The ISO was on the automatic setting although I can set it manually. What ISO would you recommend for shots like these?

[mathjak107]

with tripod i turn auto iso off. i set iso at 200... i shoot raw so all in camera settings are also set to low such as contrast and saturation..

i want my histogram giving me as much latitude as i can get befor showing blow out so im not fooled by the color profile im using showing that im farther right then i really am . ..

if things show blowout ill switch to the blinkies and see if its anything important and how does my main subjects look. if they are still dark ill raise exposure until i capture the subjects....


sometimes its just impossible so ill take multiple exposures and merge them all.

st patricks cathedral is handheld at iso 1600 and the nikon 50mm f1.4 with the d300, the train is iso 1000 handheld, grand central station is 800 iso handheld with the 50mm





[IMG][/IMG]