Arches at night

[Ben Egbert]

Actually early morning in March, very cold. A full moon at my back to illuminate the scene. I actually processed this dark, it was very bright in the RAW exposure, but trying for more of a night time feel.

I would like to present one of this series each week to sort of test the water for the style. Stars without a milky way, and a well lit foreground.

Critique appreciated.

View media item 371

 

[AlanLichty]

I like this - and the idea behind it. I have tried this in a couple of locations to date with highly mixed results. Yours is better than my last effort.

 

[Ben Egbert]

I like this - and the idea behind it. I have tried this in a couple of locations to date with highly mixed results. Yours is better than my last effort.

Thanks Alan, this is an easy thing to shot, and a tough thing to process. Getting the colors right and the exposure to seem right are difficult because we have no natural frame of reference. The rocks were too red when I processed it and I have removed a lot of brightness and saturation in this one.

 

[Timmeh]

Hi Ben,

I really like this take. The warmer light on the hoodoos (are they too big to call them hoodoos?) contrasts the blue of the sky very well, and I think the darker overall image is appropriate to the fell of night.

TIm

 

[Ben Egbert]

Hi Ben,

I really like this take. The warmer light on the hoodoos (are they too big to call them hoodoos?) contrasts the blue of the sky very well, and I think the darker overall image is appropriate to the fell of night.

TIm

Thanks Tim, that one is called balanced rock and is bigger then the typical hoodoo. Glad you liked the processing.

 

[Luvwine]

I like this, but it seems like an image that might benefit from a larger presentation. The subject is fairly small in the frame. As a night shot, however, perhaps noise might make it start to break down at larger sizes. If it is sharp and not too noisy, this is one you might see if you like bigger. It is a very pleasant picture as is, however. Thanks for sharing!

Edit: I only clicked on the image one time, not twice as needed to see it bigger. Sorry bout that--it is a fine image! Jim Fox's suggestion below on the Sky makes sense to give the stars a bit mor pop. An image worth working on!

 

[JimFox]

Hey Ben,

I like the look of this, the sky is sufficiently dark enough. The one thing that is missing for me is the stars, they are too dim. Obviously the moon was washing out the stars, but there is no reason you can't brighten them back up a bit. It's really easy to do, and when I have a scene like this where the moon was washing everything out this is what I do.

Duplicate your original 2 times.

Top layer, draw a layer mask that just selects the sky a little bit above the horizon, and feather it by about 200

2nd layer down, use Color Range and zoomed in to 100%, select a star. Adjust the Fuzziness Slider as needed to select most of the stars. Create a Layer Mask from that selection. Do not Feather it at all.

Now, comes your adjustments.

On the 2nd layer down, now darken your sky. Since the stars have been selected in the layer mask to pull from the bottom layer, as you darken the sky, the stars do not also darken, hence they will be brighter just from that alone.

Now last on the bottom layer, brighten it up which in turns will cause the stars in the image to be brighter. Adjust it in moderation so that the stars still look naturally bright.

Hope that helps or gives you some ideas.

Jim

 

[Ben Egbert]

Thanks a lot Jim, great advice, I an going to try it, plus if I do any more of these, I will select a darker phase of the Moon. I have a version of this that is just starting to show a milky way, but it is far to bright elsewhere.

 

[Ben Egbert]

I like this, but it seems like an image that might benefit from a larger presentation. The subject is fairly small in the frame. As a night shot, however, perhaps noise might make it start to break down at larger sizes. If it is sharp and not too noisy, this is one you might see if you like bigger. It is a very pleasant picture as is, however. Thanks for sharing!

Edit: I only clicked on the image one time, not twice as needed to see it bigger. Sorry bout that--it is a fine image! Jim Fox's suggestion below on the Sky makes sense to give the stars a bit mor pop. An image worth working on!

Thanks I do wish that one click would expand the image to posted size. This looks a lot better on a 4K 26 inch monitor, buy so far all of these type shots have been too dark for printing so I have not done many lately.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Here is my attempt at Jims workflow. Note, I had to change some of the layer work like taking the inverse of the star selection.

View media item 376

 

[AlanLichty]

Hmm - I think I might try applying that workflow on a couple of old efforts of my own.

The new version looks much more compelling Ben.

 

[Ben Egbert]

I googled some milky way tutorials and came up with this, done mostly in ACR with some Topaz exposure and a large radius small amount usm brushed over the stars.

This post should be in critique, next time I will start there.

View media item 377

 

[AlanLichty]

Interesting - you have far more visible stars now in this last variant. Links for the tutorials you used for this?

 

[alatoo]

Ben, I like the first one more than the last edit, the colors are just more accurate. As about shooting at night without light paining, I had good luck with Moon being less than 1/4 - then there is enough light for the foreground, but the stars appear bright enough.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Interesting - you have far more visible stars now in this last variant. Links for the tutorials you used for this?

Here ya go Alan. I saved the ACR settings as a preset and adjust from there. I think I don't like the WB suggestions. Too blue. He was using a Sony, I am using a canon, a 5d3 in this case.

The Large radius USM is something I had read before but now I cannot find it. It really brings out the stars. On my home screen, I can start to see the MW, but just faintly.

https://improvephotography.com/39977/ultimate-guide-editing-milky-way-photo/

 

[Ben Egbert]

Ben, I like the first one more than the last edit, the colors are just more accurate. As about shooting at night without light paining, I had good luck with Moon being less than 1/4 - then there is enough light for the foreground, but the stars appear bright enough.

Agreed Sasha, I like the colors in the first best, but the stars in the last. I plan to try a 1/4 moon when I can get back out again.

 

[JimFox]

Hey Ben,

Sorry for the late response.

I agree with Sasha about the feel of the first, but I do agree with you that the stars look better in the last one you did. Perhaps all you need to do with the last one is just desaturate the whole image about 10%?

I will have to check out that tutorial later.

Jim

 

[Ben Egbert]

Hey Ben,

Sorry for the late response.

I agree with Sasha about the feel of the first, but I do agree with you that the stars look better in the last one you did. Perhaps all you need to do with the last one is just desaturate the whole image about 10%?

I will have to check out that tutorial later.

Jim

Thanks for the feedback Jim. I did it over with a different WB and liked it better. But I just returned from my first photo outing this morning in weeks and will be preoccupied, so I am thinking I will work the pp for this type of shot later and post a different image next week and on the critique board.