Shooting Sunrises

Print film will not do it, use slide film
"David Edwards" wrote in message
news:h4Q%c.6248$5Y6.883@trnddc07...
The other day while I was on the way to work I stopped to shoot a sunrise
that I had noticed over the last couple of years, looked particularly
interesting this time of the year. As I top a certain hillcrest, in the
valley usually is a light fog, with tree covered hilly terrain and the sun
is a huge red dot filtered through the haze instead of its usual bright
white. I have tried several times to capture this scene, but I can't seem
to get it right. What camera settings or filters do I need? I have been
using Fuji Superia 400 cause that's what I have a supply of, a Nikon N90s
and f stops from wide open to the other extreme. I have tried to focus on
the trees in the distance and using the focus lock, reframe the scene and
shoot. It just doesn't give me the colors I am seeing with my eyes. What
do I need to do differently?


--------
David E.
nitehawk01 at verizon dot net

Print film will not do it, use slide film
"David Edwards" wrote in message
news:h4Q%c.6248$5Y6.883@trnddc07...
The other day while I was on the way to work I stopped to shoot a sunrise
that I had noticed over the last couple of years, looked particularly
interesting this time of the year. As I top a certain hillcrest, in the
valley usually is a light fog, with tree covered hilly terrain and the sun
is a huge red dot filtered through the haze instead of its usual bright
white. I have tried several times to capture this scene, but I can't seem
to get it right. What camera settings or filters do I need? I have been
using Fuji Superia 400 cause that's what I have a supply of, a Nikon N90s
and f stops from wide open to the other extreme. I have tried to focus on
the trees in the distance and using the focus lock, reframe the scene and
shoot. It just doesn't give me the colors I am seeing with my eyes. What
do I need to do differently?


--------
David E.
nitehawk01 at verizon dot net

"David Edwards" wrote in message
news:h4Q%c.6248$5Y6.883@trnddc07...
The other day while I was on the way to work I stopped to shoot a sunrise
that I had noticed over the last couple of years, looked particularly
interesting this time of the year. As I top a certain hillcrest, in the
valley usually is a light fog, with tree covered hilly terrain and the sun
is a huge red dot filtered through the haze instead of its usual bright
white. I have tried several times to capture this scene, but I can't seem
to
get it right. What camera settings or filters do I need? I have been using
Fuji Superia 400 cause that's what I have a supply of, a Nikon N90s and f
stops from wide open to the other extreme. I have tried to focus on the
trees in the distance and using the focus lock, reframe the scene and
shoot.
It just doesn't give me the colors I am seeing with my eyes. What do I
need
to do differently?


There's two potential things at work here.

One, as others have pointed out, is the lab may be adjusting the
exposure during the print stage and not producing what you captured on film.
Most labs are set to produce an "average" exposure from the overall scene,
which doesn't work if the scene isn't really average. Sunrises tend to
qualify among these, because the sky is bright, much brighter than the
foreground landscape. Take a close look at the negative and see if it looks
more colorful than your prints. If so, take it back and have them redo it,
several times if necessary, bracketing the exposure.

The other thing might be how the camera metered the scene as you were
taking the shot. Camera meters also adjust for an average light level, so
aimed at the sky, even muted by fog, the exposure would be darkened down to
a level of overcast clouds, probably destroying the foreground detail. In
heavy fog, you would probably want to overexpose by about a stop, perhaps
two, to produce the glow from the sky and a reasonably accurate rendition of
the sun. If you're aimed directly at the sun, you should adjust much
further, but best bet is to get a reading from the sky 30-45 degrees away
from the sun, increase exposure, then lock that setting and take the
picture. Take several, adjusting incrementally.

Superia 400 is a pretty good overall film, well-balanced and possessing
a good exposure range, though it seems to respond poorly to too much
exposure - this does not relate to increasing exposure as discussed above,
because you're compensating for the camera actually underexposing a bright
scene. The film should be good for a couple of stops of adjustment in the
print stage, so even getting close to the ideal exposure level should allow
you to get good prints from the negatives, as long as the lab tries to
accomplish this.

Bear in mind, when shooting against the sky and especially towards the
sun, there is often a very broad range of light levels between the sky and
your foreground, so much that the film can't capture it. Film has a much
higher contrast level than our eyes seem to show us, and in some cases, it
simply can't get the full range of highlights and shadows from some
situations. Your camera can give you some indication of these situations, by
getting a meter reading aimed at the sky first, then at the ground. If these
are more than 5 stops apart or so, you can safely assume that you can't
capture both in the same image - either the sky will blow out to pure white
or the foreground will become murky to black. Just one of those things -
pick one or the other, or try to even them out with a graduated
neutral-density filter (season to taste - I detest them, myself).

Hope this helps. Good luck!

- Al.


--
To reply, insert a dash between "wading" and "in".
Please excuse the changed format, I'm working remotely.

"David Edwards" wrote in message
news:h4Q%c.6248$5Y6.883@trnddc07...
The other day while I was on the way to work I stopped to shoot a sunrise
that I had noticed over the last couple of years, looked particularly
interesting this time of the year. As I top a certain hillcrest, in the
valley usually is a light fog, with tree covered hilly terrain and the sun
is a huge red dot filtered through the haze instead of its usual bright
white. I have tried several times to capture this scene, but I can't seem
to
get it right. What camera settings or filters do I need? I have been using
Fuji Superia 400 cause that's what I have a supply of, a Nikon N90s and f
stops from wide open to the other extreme. I have tried to focus on the
trees in the distance and using the focus lock, reframe the scene and
shoot.
It just doesn't give me the colors I am seeing with my eyes. What do I
need
to do differently?


There's two potential things at work here.

One, as others have pointed out, is the lab may be adjusting the
exposure during the print stage and not producing what you captured on film.
Most labs are set to produce an "average" exposure from the overall scene,
which doesn't work if the scene isn't really average. Sunrises tend to
qualify among these, because the sky is bright, much brighter than the
foreground landscape. Take a close look at the negative and see if it looks
more colorful than your prints. If so, take it back and have them redo it,
several times if necessary, bracketing the exposure.

The other thing might be how the camera metered the scene as you were
taking the shot. Camera meters also adjust for an average light level, so
aimed at the sky, even muted by fog, the exposure would be darkened down to
a level of overcast clouds, probably destroying the foreground detail. In
heavy fog, you would probably want to overexpose by about a stop, perhaps
two, to produce the glow from the sky and a reasonably accurate rendition of
the sun. If you're aimed directly at the sun, you should adjust much
further, but best bet is to get a reading from the sky 30-45 degrees away
from the sun, increase exposure, then lock that setting and take the
picture. Take several, adjusting incrementally.

Superia 400 is a pretty good overall film, well-balanced and possessing
a good exposure range, though it seems to respond poorly to too much
exposure - this does not relate to increasing exposure as discussed above,
because you're compensating for the camera actually underexposing a bright
scene. The film should be good for a couple of stops of adjustment in the
print stage, so even getting close to the ideal exposure level should allow
you to get good prints from the negatives, as long as the lab tries to
accomplish this.

Bear in mind, when shooting against the sky and especially towards the
sun, there is often a very broad range of light levels between the sky and
your foreground, so much that the film can't capture it. Film has a much
higher contrast level than our eyes seem to show us, and in some cases, it
simply can't get the full range of highlights and shadows from some
situations. Your camera can give you some indication of these situations, by
getting a meter reading aimed at the sky first, then at the ground. If these
are more than 5 stops apart or so, you can safely assume that you can't
capture both in the same image - either the sky will blow out to pure white
or the foreground will become murky to black. Just one of those things -
pick one or the other, or try to even them out with a graduated
neutral-density filter (season to taste - I detest them, myself).

Hope this helps. Good luck!

- Al.


--
To reply, insert a dash between "wading" and "in".
Please excuse the changed format, I'm working remotely.

Well first of all thank you all for your input and ideas. I will check on
the film processor to see if we can get a good print from my negatives. When
time rolls around for my assignment next year I will have a few new tricks
to try. Thank you all. Which ND filter should I get? The one that cuts down
1 f stop or should I go for something denser? I looked at Jim's web page and
he had several sunrises and sunsets that had the effect I was trying to
capture. Jim, how did you get the red tint to remain in your shots. Which
grade of ND filter do you recommend?

--------
David Edwards
nitehawk01 at verizon dot net


"David Edwards" wrote in message
news:h4Q%c.6248$5Y6.883@trnddc07...
The other day while I was on the way to work I stopped to shoot a sunrise
that I had noticed over the last couple of years, looked particularly
interesting this time of the year. As I top a certain hillcrest, in the
valley usually is a light fog, with tree covered hilly terrain and the sun
is a huge red dot filtered through the haze instead of its usual bright
white. I have tried several times to capture this scene, but I can't seem
to get it right. What camera settings or filters do I need? I have been
using Fuji Superia 400 cause that's what I have a supply of, a Nikon N90s
and f stops from wide open to the other extreme. I have tried to focus on
the trees in the distance and using the focus lock, reframe the scene and
shoot. It just doesn't give me the colors I am seeing with my eyes. What
do I need to do differently?


--------
David E.
nitehawk01 at verizon dot net

Well first of all thank you all for your input and ideas. I will check on
the film processor to see if we can get a good print from my negatives. When
time rolls around for my assignment next year I will have a few new tricks
to try. Thank you all. Which ND filter should I get? The one that cuts down
1 f stop or should I go for something denser? I looked at Jim's web page and
he had several sunrises and sunsets that had the effect I was trying to
capture. Jim, how did you get the red tint to remain in your shots. Which
grade of ND filter do you recommend?

--------
David Edwards
nitehawk01 at verizon dot net


"David Edwards" wrote in message
news:h4Q%c.6248$5Y6.883@trnddc07...
The other day while I was on the way to work I stopped to shoot a sunrise
that I had noticed over the last couple of years, looked particularly
interesting this time of the year. As I top a certain hillcrest, in the
valley usually is a light fog, with tree covered hilly terrain and the sun
is a huge red dot filtered through the haze instead of its usual bright
white. I have tried several times to capture this scene, but I can't seem
to get it right. What camera settings or filters do I need? I have been
using Fuji Superia 400 cause that's what I have a supply of, a Nikon N90s
and f stops from wide open to the other extreme. I have tried to focus on
the trees in the distance and using the focus lock, reframe the scene and
shoot. It just doesn't give me the colors I am seeing with my eyes. What
do I need to do differently?


--------
David E.
nitehawk01 at verizon dot net

Most people who (successfully) shoot moon and sun shots make two exposures.
One for the ball and one for the scenery. Then blend the two pictures in
Photoshop of a similar program. You simply cannot expect any film to capture
the contrast range of shooting into the sun or moon. Rasther than watse time
trying, shoot 2 pics next time and merge them after you scacn the film. You
might be surprised at the results!

\Ryadia
--------------
"Al Denelsbeck" wrote in message
...

"David Edwards" wrote in message
news:h4Q%c.6248$5Y6.883@trnddc07...
The other day while I was on the way to work I stopped to shoot a
sunrise
that I had noticed over the last couple of years, looked particularly
interesting this time of the year. As I top a certain hillcrest, in the
valley usually is a light fog, with tree covered hilly terrain and the
sun
is a huge red dot filtered through the haze instead of its usual bright
white. I have tried several times to capture this scene, but I can't
seem
to
get it right. What camera settings or filters do I need? I have been
using
Fuji Superia 400 cause that's what I have a supply of, a Nikon N90s and
f
stops from wide open to the other extreme. I have tried to focus on the
trees in the distance and using the focus lock, reframe the scene and
shoot.
It just doesn't give me the colors I am seeing with my eyes. What do I
need
to do differently?


There's two potential things at work here.

One, as others have pointed out, is the lab may be adjusting the
exposure during the print stage and not producing what you captured on
film.
Most labs are set to produce an "average" exposure from the overall scene,
which doesn't work if the scene isn't really average. Sunrises tend to
qualify among these, because the sky is bright, much brighter than the
foreground landscape. Take a close look at the negative and see if it
looks
more colorful than your prints. If so, take it back and have them redo it,
several times if necessary, bracketing the exposure.

The other thing might be how the camera metered the scene as you were
taking the shot. Camera meters also adjust for an average light level, so
aimed at the sky, even muted by fog, the exposure would be darkened down
to
a level of overcast clouds, probably destroying the foreground detail. In
heavy fog, you would probably want to overexpose by about a stop, perhaps
two, to produce the glow from the sky and a reasonably accurate rendition
of
the sun. If you're aimed directly at the sun, you should adjust much
further, but best bet is to get a reading from the sky 30-45 degrees away
from the sun, increase exposure, then lock that setting and take the
picture. Take several, adjusting incrementally.

Superia 400 is a pretty good overall film, well-balanced and
possessing
a good exposure range, though it seems to respond poorly to too much
exposure - this does not relate to increasing exposure as discussed above,
because you're compensating for the camera actually underexposing a bright
scene. The film should be good for a couple of stops of adjustment in the
print stage, so even getting close to the ideal exposure level should
allow
you to get good prints from the negatives, as long as the lab tries to
accomplish this.

Bear in mind, when shooting against the sky and especially towards the
sun, there is often a very broad range of light levels between the sky and
your foreground, so much that the film can't capture it. Film has a much
higher contrast level than our eyes seem to show us, and in some cases, it
simply can't get the full range of highlights and shadows from some
situations. Your camera can give you some indication of these situations,
by
getting a meter reading aimed at the sky first, then at the ground. If
these
are more than 5 stops apart or so, you can safely assume that you can't
capture both in the same image - either the sky will blow out to pure
white
or the foreground will become murky to black. Just one of those things -
pick one or the other, or try to even them out with a graduated
neutral-density filter (season to taste - I detest them, myself).

Hope this helps. Good luck!

- Al.


--
To reply, insert a dash between "wading" and "in".
Please excuse the changed format, I'm working remotely.

"David Edwards" wrote in message
news:IHa0d.9410$Q44.2035@trnddc09...
Well first of all thank you all for your input and ideas. I will check on
the film processor to see if we can get a good print from my negatives.
When
time rolls around for my assignment next year I will have a few new tricks
to try. Thank you all. Which ND filter should I get? The one that cuts
down
1 f stop or should I go for something denser? I looked at Jim's web page
and
he had several sunrises and sunsets that had the effect I was trying to
capture. Jim, how did you get the red tint to remain in your shots. Which
grade of ND filter do you recommend?


Not Jim, but I'll chip in anyway: the best thing is to use a spot-meter to
measure how many stops apart the sky and the foreground are, and base your
choice of ND grad. on that.

If they are, say, three stops apart you _could_ get a three stop ND, in
which case you'd be able to retain maximum detail in both sky and
foreground, but at the cost of (what I feel is) a a somewhat artificial
looking result. This sort of shot appears on lots of calendars... A two
stop ND - in this 'three stop difference' situation - would be my choice:
the sky remains a stop brighter than the foreground so looks reasonably
natural, but you have much more scope to include the shadow and highlight
detail in both. A one stop would give a result that would look very natural
to the eye, but still help a bit by giving you effectivey one more stop of
total tonal range.

So, I'd suggest metering sky and foreground - ideally use a spot-meter and
choose in each to meter what you would regard as a 'mid-tone' if you were
shooting _only_ the sky or _only_ the foreground. Then I'd try an ND
grad. that was one stop less than that indicated difference. This is a
starting point, and you still need to think carefully about your final
exposure too.



Peter

"David Edwards" wrote in message
news:IHa0d.9410$Q44.2035@trnddc09...
Well first of all thank you all for your input and ideas. I will check on
the film processor to see if we can get a good print from my negatives.
When
time rolls around for my assignment next year I will have a few new tricks
to try. Thank you all. Which ND filter should I get? The one that cuts
down
1 f stop or should I go for something denser? I looked at Jim's web page
and
he had several sunrises and sunsets that had the effect I was trying to
capture. Jim, how did you get the red tint to remain in your shots. Which
grade of ND filter do you recommend?


Not Jim, but I'll chip in anyway: the best thing is to use a spot-meter to
measure how many stops apart the sky and the foreground are, and base your
choice of ND grad. on that.

If they are, say, three stops apart you _could_ get a three stop ND, in
which case you'd be able to retain maximum detail in both sky and
foreground, but at the cost of (what I feel is) a a somewhat artificial
looking result. This sort of shot appears on lots of calendars... A two
stop ND - in this 'three stop difference' situation - would be my choice:
the sky remains a stop brighter than the foreground so looks reasonably
natural, but you have much more scope to include the shadow and highlight
detail in both. A one stop would give a result that would look very natural
to the eye, but still help a bit by giving you effectivey one more stop of
total tonal range.

So, I'd suggest metering sky and foreground - ideally use a spot-meter and
choose in each to meter what you would regard as a 'mid-tone' if you were
shooting _only_ the sky or _only_ the foreground. Then I'd try an ND
grad. that was one stop less than that indicated difference. This is a
starting point, and you still need to think carefully about your final
exposure too.



Peter

"David Edwards" wrote in message
news:IHa0d.9410$Q44.2035@trnddc09...
Well first of all thank you all for your input and ideas. I will check on
the film processor to see if we can get a good print from my negatives.

My Epson scanner scans negatives. Whenever I'm not satisfied with a print, I
scan the negative to see what it looks like without any adjustments to
figure out if there is a way of getting a better print out of it.