Getting very Frustrated.

[Nautifish]

I took this picture tonight down at the beach. The moon was shining bright over the water and was just beautiful...I have been trying and trying and trying with these night shots but they allways seem to come out crap. I was out for two hr's tonight and this is it.

 

[white]

What were the camera settings?

 

[Nautifish]

I actually had it set on Night seen and Auto Focus.......Plus i tryed a hundred other settings and this was the best out of all of them...& IT STILL LOOKS TERRIBLE,,,,Grrrr..lol

 

[mbbye]

First of all, your horizon is crooked, you want to make sure you get that lined up (it's an easy fix in pp). The white balance looks off to me, the color looks to orange/red. You said that the moon was beautiful but you didn't include it in the shot, how come?

 

[loveDSLR]

First of all, your horizon is crooked, you want to make sure you get that lined up (it's an easy fix in pp). The white balance looks off to me, the color looks to orange/red. You said that the moon was beautiful but you didn't include it in the shot, how come?

If I'm not mistaken, the OP was trying to get the reflection of the moon off the water, not the moon itself.

 

[LaFoto]

How much did you compress your photo for loading it into your photo host's site? The sky looks ... well, what would be the right word for it here? Pixelated? Or is this "banded"? Or "blocking"? But that has happened because of compression and I wonder when that amount of compression happened?

Other than that I quite like what you saw and meant to capture. The reflection of the moon on the water looks good to me. The crooked horizon can very easily be corrected, that isn't the problem. Exposure looks just right to me, too, and I don't mind the pinkish colour of the street lights as that's what things look like when those lights are on... But that sky!??! What on earth happened there?

 

[Olympus E300]

I have a tendancy of being a slow learning when it comes to this photography stuff. If you look at some of my photos on Flickr, I assure you that NONE of them were first shot captures! Generally, hours go into each one of them. Why? Because I'm no professional that's why! Nor do I pretend to be! With that said, it's easy to get frustrated. The key (at least for me) is to expect to make mistakes. Therefore, I take many, many, many photos per session. Sometimes I'll fill a 4GB card very rapidly. The reasoning is this : the more photos you have, the better chance of getting one that you want to keep.

Bottom line, don't let your frustration turn you away. Photography is just like anything else - the more you learn, the faster you learn. After that, it all becomes a matter of personal taste or flavour. It may take years to consitantly produce quality shots. Roll with it!

Chin up!!
- Daniel

 

[Overread]

My first advice is to read this first post here: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...e-your-posts-get-critiques-your-work-c-c.html

Read through it then write out the details - think both compositional and techincal. We need to know what you are thinking about the shot; what you want to create can capture as well as what specific tools you have to work with and how you are currently using those tools.
Armed with that basic info not only can we make more meaningful replies to yourself, but it will also help you to objectively think about what you where doing and trying to capture. This can often result in you realising some of your own mistakes as you go through the motions of assessing your own work and writing it out.

I assure you that NONE of them were first shot captures! Generally, hours go into each one of them. Why? Because I'm no professional that's why!

What makes you think pros work any different?
Some would say the art of putting hours into a single shot and having it work as the photographer wish it to is the mark of a skilled photographer.

 

[MrBarney]

How much did you compress your photo for loading it into your photo host's site? The sky looks ... well, what would be the right word for it here? Pixelated? Or is this "banded"? Or "blocking"? But that has happened because of compression and I wonder when that amount of compression happened?

It looks like the OP is using facebook to host the file. That might explain the agressive compression and lack of exif information.

I actually had it set on Night seen and Auto Focus

A shot-in-the-dark here :lmao: but the only night scene I know about is "Night Portrait" which, iirc, fires the flash? That might explain the grey sky and lack of contrast.

 

[DanFinePhotography]

its very pix-elated, could be from the compression described above or over Post processing perhaps ? The reflection is very nice... has a ton of potential , i would plan another trip out there if you get the chance.

 

[LCARSx32]

I would try to move away from the scene modes and into one of the "manual" modes (Av, Tv, or M). When I do night shots like this, I set my aperture to whatever that particular lens is sharpest at (like f/8 on my kit lens) and then my ISO to 100 (the lowest my camera supports). Then it's just a matter of focus and shutter speed. A shot like this will probably take several seconds of shutter to get enough light to the sensor.

Like LaFoto said, it's not a bad shot. It's pretty good, actually. A fixed horizon and maybe cropping out that box next to the lighthouse and you'd have a well composed shot.

One other thing you might play with is different white balance settings. WB controls the color cast of the image. In this case, the Auto WB might not work. See how everything has that strong orange color to it? Changing the WB on the camera to the incandescent bulb setting (usually looks like a light bulb) will up the amount of blues in the image and tone down the reds/oranges. That might give you a more realistic color.

 

[Nautifish]

Good afternoon.

First i would like too say thank you so much for all the advice and input. It is truly appreciated & noted. I have read through all the comments.

I did down size the file so as to be able to add it too my face book account.
Is they're a better way to do this?

The Camera i am using is a Nikon D5000. That night i was using my 55-200mm. I could not tell you off hand how many different settings i used as they're were many.:er:
I realise i need to be patient and this could take me a long time too perfect if they're is such a thing...

This is a shot i took last night in Caledonia better but still not great. I had a really hard time trying to focus on something as it was very dark.
VR 55-200 MM
ISO 400
15 -S F/4.5

 

[sovietdoc]

at night what you need is to use a tripod, long exposure, and manual focus. Oh and the lowest iso (100)

 

[Nautifish]

I was useing my Tripod but when i went lower than iso 200 it kept telling me the subject was too dark?

 

[kundalini]

Just a couple of random thoughts about #1.

The squarish buidling on the left is not adding any interest on the image for me. I'm liking the lines on the shoreline (at camera) but wouldn't mind seeing some more of the peninsula can get in the frame. If at all possible, move your camera position to remove the left building and get more of the shoreline, as long as there is an interesting line created. It also seems if you move left, there may be a better contrast between the lighted wall of the lighthouse and the one going into shadow.

With regard to the sky, I think if you were to shoot after the sun has set, but still some colors in the sky, this could be quite nice. I could imagine some rich blues in the sky looking very nice behind the coral color of the lighthouse. It may take some patience to get all that and the moon's reflection off the water all-in-one.

Just my 2¢.