Night Pictures and blown highlights

[keethjon]

Taking pictures at night can be at the least challenging. Just want some opinions on methods you might use to show some detail in the dark or shadow areas without something like a street light dominating the whole picture. I know its best to get more details in the pictures by taking them just before the sun is totally set. But I"m talking about when there is no sun at all. Just ambient light maybe from streetlights or other artificial light sources.
Thanks in advance for your feedback.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I use manual mode and tweak the aperature and shutter till I get it right. Sometimes i use an LED light to highlight. Sometimes I flash rear sync style with a gel. I'm a nooB, I have to play with it in each pic scenario. No "standard settings" that are perfect for any and all night scenes.

 

[Tomasko]

Have you considered a HDR technique? Could be what you're looking for.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

But I"m talking about when there is no sun at all. Just ambient light maybe from streetlights or other artificial light sources

HDR? Night shots he mentions require so many 1 stop seperate exposures to make them decent. I think OP is trying learn beasic night technics before adding in mulitple exposure scenarios.

 

[Big Mike]

All photographic mediums (film or digital) have what we call the 'Dynamic Range'.
The Dynamic Range is the range/limit of brightness that we can acceptably capture in a single exposure. To simplify a complex issue, let's say that your camera can capture a range of 4 stops. (each 'stop' is twice as much light). So with 4 stops, if your brightest parts are less than 16 times brighter than your darkest parts (then you can capture detail in all the parts of your image). But if either the brighter or darker parts are outside that 4 stop range, then they won't have any detail, they will either be black (below the range) or white (above the range).

So knowing that, you can choose to expose for the darker areas, but you have to realize that your brightest area may be blown out (lost)....and if you expose for the bright areas, then your darkest areas may be left as black shadows. But if your scene exceeds your dynamic range, then you can't capture it all in one photo.

This is a limitation of photography, but it's also an opportunity for you to be creative and choose what you want to capture in your image.

 

[Tomasko]

2WheelPhoto, You can't get decent results if you want to take pictures, which clearly yell for higher dynamic range, without multiple exposures. Well, unless you either loose detail in highlights or loose detail in the shadows.
If OP wants only detail in shadows, there's always the option to meter for the shadows, so those areas will be exposed correctly. If he meters for the light, there's no way to get good details in shadow (yeah, you can bring some back if you're shooting raw, but it has it's limits).
Btw, I'm not really sure that taking a few more separate exposures is that advanced technique.....

 

[keethjon]

Thanks for your comments. I guess its like I thought. Pretty much hit and miss depending on the lighting conditions. Personally, I like to get a little detail in the shadow areas, so I guess I'll just have to accept the blown highlights. (if they're not too blown out)

 

[Big Mike]

Well, I wouldn't say it's 'hit and miss'. It's actually pretty easy to predict when & where this will happen...so if you want to avoid it, you just have to choose your scene carefully, or do something to proactively change the lighting situation.

 

[dmtx]

If the light is in one area, you might try a ND filter. The square kind you can mount on the front of the lens and position for best effect.

Have you tried to decrease the light issues using a photo editor?

 

[2WheelPhoto]

2WheelPhoto, You can't get decent results if you want to take pictures, which clearly yell for higher dynamic range, without multiple exposures. Well, unless you either loose detail in highlights or loose detail in the shadows.
If OP wants only detail in shadows, there's always the option to meter for the shadows, so those areas will be exposed correctly. If he meters for the light, there's no way to get good details in shadow (yeah, you can bring some back if you're shooting raw, but it has it's limits).
Btw, I'm not really sure that taking a few more separate exposures is that advanced technique.....

I agree, but for HDR night shots seems I have to take 9 exposures 1 stop apart and still they want to look fake HDR cartoonish if one photomatix slider gets bumped a click too far. I thought OP was looking for a more simple approach per the shadows he mentioned is all.