Natural LIght in the outdoors

[Toronto Photography]

Dark night. sunny or cloudy skies snow covered light mirrors on land and clear sky at noon or sunset and sunrise etc

What do you find the best for you kind of shooting and why?

 

[Robert111]

The quality and angle of light is of supreme importance for really good shots. I’ve returned the next day to where I shot a dramatic landscape and it wasn’t worth shooting because the light was so different.

Same story with any subject really - the light has to be good for that subject and artistic intent.

I like backlighted shots a lot.

 

[Toronto Photography]

The quality and angle of light is of supreme importance for really good shots. I’ve returned the next day to where I shot a dramatic landscape and it wasn’t worth shooting because the light was so different.

Same story with any subject really - the light has to be good for that subject and artistic intent.

I like backlighted shots a lot.

Examples of good backlighthing?

 

[Huntin4photos]

• biza43 wrote:

Landscapes - golden hour and blue hour.

 

[R Liewenberger]

Dark night. sunny or cloudy skies snow covered light mirrors on land and clear sky at noon or sunset and sunrise etc

What do you find the best for you kind of shooting and why?

A little OT, but talking about light:

Looking out a window last night at 03.30h, in a NE direction, I have seen my very first bright-green meteor! (But no camera set up, as I didn't expect it.)

My first idea was it must be some kind of fireworks, but it disappeared too quickly (1-2 seconds) for something fireworks. And 03.30h is a rather unusual time for fireworks.

It looked very close to this great picture by Prasenjeet Yadav, a web find, just the angle at which it came down was a bit different, more about 220°-230°.

Picture source: https://www.geo.de/natur/naturwunde...otograf-macht-sensationelles-bild-waehrend-er

Liewenberger

 

[jerry1]

Labe wrote:

If you haven't done so please take this one and make a large print of it. Beautiful.

 

[pmgnut]

3 different lighting scenarios for me: The "golden" hours - early a.m and late afternoon. Also any day that has bright overcast- colors remain vivid yet no harsh shadows

 

[Toronto Photography]

Dark night. sunny or cloudy skies snow covered light mirrors on land and clear sky at noon or sunset and sunrise etc

What do you find the best for you kind of shooting and why?

A little OT, but talking about light:

Looking out a window last night at 03.30h, in a NE direction, I have seen my very first bright-green meteor! (But no camera set up, as I didn't expect it.)

My first idea was it must be some kind of fireworks, but it disappeared too quickly (1-2 seconds) for something fireworks. And 03.30h is a rather unusual time for fireworks.

It looked very close to this great picture by Prasenjeet Yadav, a web find, just the angle at which it came down was a bit different, more about 220°-230°.

Picture source: https://www.geo.de/natur/naturwunde...otograf-macht-sensationelles-bild-waehrend-er

Liewenberger

That is an amazing shot. I have never seen a greet meteor. I would send it into the Society - as an aside lots of discoveries in Astronomy have been made by none scientists such as yourself- maybe this is one of them.

 

[Robert111]

The quality and angle of light is of supreme importance for really good shots. I’ve returned the next day to where I shot a dramatic landscape and it wasn’t worth shooting because the light was so different.

Same story with any subject really - the light has to be good for that subject and artistic intent.

I like backlighted shots a lot.

Examples of good backlighthing?

 

[Greg7579]

That is truly a fantastic once-in-a-lifetime shot if it is a clean one shot snap.

I like photographic art and don't care if an image becomes graphic art through the combination and blending of several images or cloning things in with PS while adding fake skies, stars or backgrounds. I have no problem with switching or enhancing colors in PS.

I don't think that happened here and didn't dig into the background of the shot. The only thing I will say is that when you view or grab these other-worldly amazing shots on the internet and there is no explanation of the details of the shot, it is often likely that the shots has been manipulated, altered, combined and had objects, light and skies cloned in.... It is getting easy to do and there is nothing wrong with it.

But I can tell you that personally as a landscape Medium Format guy I won't replace a sky. It is so easy to do but I just won't do it.

I don't mind when others do.

Again, I have no ideas what happened on this beautifully amazing shot.

 

[R Liewenberger]

Dark night. sunny or cloudy skies snow covered light mirrors on land and clear sky at noon or sunset and sunrise etc

What do you find the best for you kind of shooting and why?

A little OT, but talking about light:

Looking out a window last night at 03.30h, in a NE direction, I have seen my very first bright-green meteor! (But no camera set up, as I didn't expect it.)

My first idea was it must be some kind of fireworks, but it disappeared too quickly (1-2 seconds) for something fireworks. And 03.30h is a rather unusual time for fireworks.

It looked very close to this great picture by Prasenjeet Yadav, a web find, just the angle at which it came down was a bit different, more about 220°-230°.

Picture source: https://www.geo.de/natur/naturwunde...otograf-macht-sensationelles-bild-waehrend-er

Liewenberger

That is an amazing shot. I have never seen a greet meteor. I would send it into the Society - as an aside lots of discoveries in Astronomy have been made by none scientists such as yourself- maybe this is one of them.

I wish it was, Toronto man, but -as mentioned in my post- this is NOT MY shot! :-(

RL

 

[R Liewenberger]

That is truly a fantastic once-in-a-lifetime shot if it is a clean one shot snap.

I like photographic art and don't care if an image becomes graphic art through the combination and blending of several images or cloning things in with PS while adding fake skies, stars or backgrounds. I have no problem with switching or enhancing colors in PS.

I don't think that happened here and didn't dig into the background of the shot. The only thing I will say is that when you view or grab these other-worldly amazing shots on the internet and there is no explanation of the details of the shot, it is often likely that the shots has been manipulated, altered, combined and had objects, light and skies cloned in.... It is getting easy to do and there is nothing wrong with it.

But I can tell you that personally as a landscape Medium Format guy I won't replace a sky. It is so easy to do but I just won't do it.

I don't mind when others do.

Again, I have no ideas what happened on this beautifully amazing shot.

Greg, from reading that German language article, I don't think the Indian photographer, Prasenjeet Yadav, manipulated his great shot (which, btw, he took while sleeping!)

A translation of that article (by the best translator, DeepL):

"Green meteor

Photographer takes sensational picture - while sleeping

Nature photographer Prasenjeet Yadav succeeded in taking the picture of a lifetime while he slept: He photographed an emerald-green meteor as it passed over the hilltops of the Western Ghats.

Actually, Prasenjeet Yadav wanted to document the advancing urbanization in the Western Ghats with his pictures. He set up his camera above the southern Indian town of Mettupalayam, set it up for a time-lapse shot that lasted several hours, and slowly dozed off.

Yadav didn't realize what a sensational image was among his hundreds of long exposures until he sifted through the photos the next afternoon. Several astronomers confirmed to the photographer the rarity value of his shot: Yadav had indeed taken a green meteor in his sleep.

Why does the meteor glow green at all?

The color is determined by the chemical elements that make up the burning rock. Iron, for example, produces a yellowish light. If the fireball has a high calcium content, it glows more violet. Green glow, as in this case, was most likely caused by a high concentration of nickel or magnesium." https://www.geo.de/natur/naturwunde...otograf-macht-sensationelles-bild-waehrend-er

Liewenberger

 

[pmgnut]

They all have their place , it depends on the mood I’m after.

bright sunlight is great for infrared





And photographing wildlife with bridge cameras



Dull stormy days especially autumn/ winter also has its charm

Foggy nights even

Wow, fantastic photos Labe. How do you do the infra red??

 

[Labe]

They all have their place , it depends on the mood I’m after.

bright sunlight is great for infrared





And photographing wildlife with bridge cameras



Dull stormy days especially autumn/ winter also has its charm

Foggy nights even

Wow, fantastic photos Labe. How do you do the infra red??

I use a full spectrum modified bridge camera with a filter over the lens , which filter depends on what effect I’m after .
The main one I use is the Hoya R72 (720nm) and post process to taste.

 

[Greg7579]

That is truly a fantastic once-in-a-lifetime shot if it is a clean one shot snap.

I like photographic art and don't care if an image becomes graphic art through the combination and blending of several images or cloning things in with PS while adding fake skies, stars or backgrounds. I have no problem with switching or enhancing colors in PS.

I don't think that happened here and didn't dig into the background of the shot. The only thing I will say is that when you view or grab these other-worldly amazing shots on the internet and there is no explanation of the details of the shot, it is often likely that the shots has been manipulated, altered, combined and had objects, light and skies cloned in.... It is getting easy to do and there is nothing wrong with it.

But I can tell you that personally as a landscape Medium Format guy I won't replace a sky. It is so easy to do but I just won't do it.

I don't mind when others do.

Again, I have no ideas what happened on this beautifully amazing shot.

Greg, from reading that German language article, I don't think the Indian photographer, Prasenjeet Yadav, manipulated his great shot (which, btw, he took while sleeping!)

A translation of that article (by the best translator, DeepL):

"Green meteor

Photographer takes sensational picture - while sleeping

Nature photographer Prasenjeet Yadav succeeded in taking the picture of a lifetime while he slept: He photographed an emerald-green meteor as it passed over the hilltops of the Western Ghats.

Actually, Prasenjeet Yadav wanted to document the advancing urbanization in the Western Ghats with his pictures. He set up his camera above the southern Indian town of Mettupalayam, set it up for a time-lapse shot that lasted several hours, and slowly dozed off.

Yadav didn't realize what a sensational image was among his hundreds of long exposures until he sifted through the photos the next afternoon. Several astronomers confirmed to the photographer the rarity value of his shot: Yadav had indeed taken a green meteor in his sleep.

Why does the meteor glow green at all?

The color is determined by the chemical elements that make up the burning rock. Iron, for example, produces a yellowish light. If the fireball has a high calcium content, it glows more violet. Green glow, as in this case, was most likely caused by a high concentration of nickel or magnesium." https://www.geo.de/natur/naturwunde...otograf-macht-sensationelles-bild-waehrend-er

Liewenberger

I admit I was suspicious of it but its a great image nonetheless. I would need to see the raw or a higher res version. Those stars above with the clouds below and the light rays streaking through the clouds like twilight post-storm and on top of that the bright vibrant meteorite. That seems completely impossible to me and even my GFX 100 doesn't have that kind of DR. But I don't know. I'm looking at a thumbnail. It looks like a lot of blending of skies from other images to me. But I could be wrong.

 

[Toronto Photography]

The quality and angle of light is of supreme importance for really good shots. I’ve returned the next day to where I shot a dramatic landscape and it wasn’t worth shooting because the light was so different.

Same story with any subject really - the light has to be good for that subject and artistic intent.

I like backlighted shots a lot.

Examples of good backlighthing?

Magnificent Example with no need to be magnanimous.

 

[KenBPhoto]

If I'm shooting waterfalls like last week I prefer cloud cover. It cuts down on the glare coming off the water. I've actually made a video on my technique and you can see some great waterfalls in the North Pennines and the Peak district in the UK. Here's the link.

Even with sunsets I prefer some high clouds in the sky. I use a app called Photopills to determine what the cloud cover looks like. You need to have something for all that light to bounce off of.

 

[Greg7579]

Bald skies are my enemy.

 

[Al D]

That is truly a fantastic once-in-a-lifetime shot if it is a clean one shot snap.

I like photographic art and don't care if an image becomes graphic art through the combination and blending of several images or cloning things in with PS while adding fake skies, stars or backgrounds. I have no problem with switching or enhancing colors in PS.

I don't think that happened here and didn't dig into the background of the shot. The only thing I will say is that when you view or grab these other-worldly amazing shots on the internet and there is no explanation of the details of the shot, it is often likely that the shots has been manipulated, altered, combined and had objects, light and skies cloned in.... It is getting easy to do and there is nothing wrong with it.

But I can tell you that personally as a landscape Medium Format guy I won't replace a sky. It is so easy to do but I just won't do it.

I don't mind when others do.

Again, I have no ideas what happened on this beautifully amazing shot.

Greg, from reading that German language article, I don't think the Indian photographer, Prasenjeet Yadav, manipulated his great shot (which, btw, he took while sleeping!)

A translation of that article (by the best translator, DeepL):

"Green meteor

Photographer takes sensational picture - while sleeping

Nature photographer Prasenjeet Yadav succeeded in taking the picture of a lifetime while he slept: He photographed an emerald-green meteor as it passed over the hilltops of the Western Ghats.

Actually, Prasenjeet Yadav wanted to document the advancing urbanization in the Western Ghats with his pictures. He set up his camera above the southern Indian town of Mettupalayam, set it up for a time-lapse shot that lasted several hours, and slowly dozed off.

Yadav didn't realize what a sensational image was among his hundreds of long exposures until he sifted through the photos the next afternoon. Several astronomers confirmed to the photographer the rarity value of his shot: Yadav had indeed taken a green meteor in his sleep.

Why does the meteor glow green at all?

The color is determined by the chemical elements that make up the burning rock. Iron, for example, produces a yellowish light. If the fireball has a high calcium content, it glows more violet. Green glow, as in this case, was most likely caused by a high concentration of nickel or magnesium." https://www.geo.de/natur/naturwunde...otograf-macht-sensationelles-bild-waehrend-er

Liewenberger

I admit I was suspicious of it but its a great image nonetheless. I would need to see the raw or a higher res version. Those stars above with the clouds below and the light rays streaking through the clouds like twilight post-storm and on top of that the bright vibrant meteorite. That seems completely impossible to me and even my GFX 100 doesn't have that kind of DR. But I don't know. I'm looking at a thumbnail. It looks like a lot of blending of skies from other images to me. But I could be wrong.

Perhaps you can ask him. You can view a slightly higher res version of it in his gallery: Gallery — Prasenjeet Yadav.

As you can read in the article, he was doing a time lapse, long exposures. He had multiple images he could work with to render this image.

Also, you might be underestimating what your own camera can do... ;-)

--
‘You don’t take a photograph, you make it.’ - Ansel Adams

 

[Greg7579]

That is truly a fantastic once-in-a-lifetime shot if it is a clean one shot snap.

I like photographic art and don't care if an image becomes graphic art through the combination and blending of several images or cloning things in with PS while adding fake skies, stars or backgrounds. I have no problem with switching or enhancing colors in PS.

I don't think that happened here and didn't dig into the background of the shot. The only thing I will say is that when you view or grab these other-worldly amazing shots on the internet and there is no explanation of the details of the shot, it is often likely that the shots has been manipulated, altered, combined and had objects, light and skies cloned in.... It is getting easy to do and there is nothing wrong with it.

But I can tell you that personally as a landscape Medium Format guy I won't replace a sky. It is so easy to do but I just won't do it.

I don't mind when others do.

Again, I have no ideas what happened on this beautifully amazing shot.

Greg, from reading that German language article, I don't think the Indian photographer, Prasenjeet Yadav, manipulated his great shot (which, btw, he took while sleeping!)

A translation of that article (by the best translator, DeepL):

"Green meteor

Photographer takes sensational picture - while sleeping

Nature photographer Prasenjeet Yadav succeeded in taking the picture of a lifetime while he slept: He photographed an emerald-green meteor as it passed over the hilltops of the Western Ghats.

Actually, Prasenjeet Yadav wanted to document the advancing urbanization in the Western Ghats with his pictures. He set up his camera above the southern Indian town of Mettupalayam, set it up for a time-lapse shot that lasted several hours, and slowly dozed off.

Yadav didn't realize what a sensational image was among his hundreds of long exposures until he sifted through the photos the next afternoon. Several astronomers confirmed to the photographer the rarity value of his shot: Yadav had indeed taken a green meteor in his sleep.

Why does the meteor glow green at all?

The color is determined by the chemical elements that make up the burning rock. Iron, for example, produces a yellowish light. If the fireball has a high calcium content, it glows more violet. Green glow, as in this case, was most likely caused by a high concentration of nickel or magnesium." https://www.geo.de/natur/naturwunde...otograf-macht-sensationelles-bild-waehrend-er

Liewenberger

I admit I was suspicious of it but its a great image nonetheless. I would need to see the raw or a higher res version. Those stars above with the clouds below and the light rays streaking through the clouds like twilight post-storm and on top of that the bright vibrant meteorite. That seems completely impossible to me and even my GFX 100 doesn't have that kind of DR. But I don't know. I'm looking at a thumbnail. It looks like a lot of blending of skies from other images to me. But I could be wrong.

Perhaps you can ask him. You can view a slightly higher res version of it in his gallery: Gallery — Prasenjeet Yadav.

As you can read in the article, he was doing a time lapse, long exposures. He had multiple images he could work with to render this image.

Also, you might be underestimating what your own camera can do... ;-)

I know what my camera can and can't do. That is not about the camera. That is about extensive post processing and there is no doubt that the image is photographic - graphic art and was a blend and combination of several images and most likely blending in some skies from a library of completely different images. Nothing wrong with that.

I don't do it, but I do a lot of focus bracketing and stacking in Helicon Focus and often use 150 images or more for that....

 

[Al D]

I admit I was suspicious of it but its a great image nonetheless. I would need to see the raw or a higher res version. Those stars above with the clouds below and the light rays streaking through the clouds like twilight post-storm and on top of that the bright vibrant meteorite. That seems completely impossible to me and even my GFX 100 doesn't have that kind of DR. But I don't know. I'm looking at a thumbnail. It looks like a lot of blending of skies from other images to me. But I could be wrong.

Perhaps you can ask him. You can view a slightly higher res version of it in his gallery: Gallery — Prasenjeet Yadav.

As you can read in the article, he was doing a time lapse, long exposures. He had multiple images he could work with to render this image.

Also, you might be underestimating what your own camera can do... ;-)

I know what my camera can and can't do. That is not about the camera. That is about extensive post processing and there is no doubt that the image is photographic - graphic art and was a blend and combination of several images and most likely blending in some skies from a library of completely different images. Nothing wrong with that.

I don't do it, but I do a lot of focus bracketing and stacking in Helicon Focus and often use 150 images or more for that....

You mentioned your camera. I had a look at your photos on Flickr and you obviously know what your camera can do, fantastic photos. My comment was more related to my own experience with nightime photos and how I'm just amazed at what I can do with my own raw files, just directly without even stacking or blending, only masking, dodging and burning, old tricks. I can just imagine wihat a medium format like your GFX can do.

As for the meteor photo, hard to say, there's no exif info or anything else to inform about how it was processed. As you speculate, we might be looking at a complete sky replacement in the upper part of the image.

--
‘You don’t take a photograph, you make it.’ - Ansel Adams