Your "Tower Bridge at Night" shot

Discussion in 'Wanderlust and Travel' started by BostonRott, Jun 4, 2007.

  1. I'm sure many who visit London photograph the Tower Bridge at night.

    After seeing Ron Reznik's GORGEOUS shot of it, I made a note of his EXIF and attempted to copy it myself. Herein lies the difference between a Master and a student. :redface: :smile:

    Here is Ron's image that inspired me to try this:
    28mm f/1.4D, 1/4s @ f/5.6
    [​IMG]

    Here is mine:
    1/4s f/2.8 at 28.0mm iso160 using the 28-70/2.8
    79992754.

    So let's see YOUR shot of the Tower Bridge at night! :smile: Thought this might be a fun exercise, b/c I'm sure there are LOTS of these photos floating around. *If* you have the EXIF data, share that too. Look forward to seeing everyone's photos!! :smile:
     
  2. jbing

    jbing

    217
    Aug 4, 2005
    Medford, Oregon
    Both very nice shots. My question would be, do you think Ron had some sort of ND filter or split-ND filter on to accomplish this shot without all of the harsh highlight? In other words do you think he had some sort filter allowing the tone to remain a little flat yet still incredibly detailed?

    Maybe not after just looking at the water,very crisp, not hazy. I don't know, jhust a thought!

    Again, both great shots.
     
  3. I'm not really sure, and I'd love to learn. The night I was shooting, it was misty and bordering on "rainy." I used a table-top tripod set up on the wall along the river.
     
  4. I keep a sky-1a on the 28/1.4 most of the time to allow the color to match my other lenses (it imparts a slightly blue cast to pull in more light).

    Check the EXIF again -- I'm shooting at ISO 200, which gains 1/3 stop over your ISO 160, but I'm shooting f/5.6 which loses 1.67 stops vs. your f/2.8. Note the difference in the exposure, esp. in the strongly-lit areas. This is the primary difference in the shots -- I have a lower level of exposure overall and greater DOF, plus note how the aperture treats the bright spotlights -- small sources with short rays vs. blobs of light.

    If you'd have shot at f/5-f/11, you'd have been within the sweet spot of the 28-70 AFS. I can shoot f/2 to f/11 with the 28/1.4, and choose the aperture based on the DOF as well as how the light is handled. Smaller apertures yield smaller saturated regions around bright light sources and longer rays (plus more DOF). I could show you examples, if you like.

    Ron
     
  5. I might be wrong but I think a few of the lights on the bridge weren't working when Ron took his shot. That is not to say there is anything wrong with either shot. In fact oth are so good that you can almost count the difference in light bulbs between them
     
  6. You're right, Fred, it was lit differently -- note esp. the roof on the far left tower. The primary difference in the look of the two shots is due to the exposure.

    Here are two examples of the difference aperture can make in the look of lights. In the Isola Tiberina Bridge shot, I show the f/11 shot with insets at f/5.6, f/8 and f/11. In the Castle San Angelo shot, I show both the f/5.6 shot and the f/8 shot. Note the difference in the rendering of lights. Click the images for the best look.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Ron
     
  7. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    Thank You Ron.....

    Beautiful images
     
  8. Thanks for the explanation, Ron. It was very helpful and I’m sure there are a lot of people who are grateful for you taking the time to discuss. Hopefully one of these days I can make one of your sessions, or Frank will have you back to Alabama.
     
  9. Stunning shots!

    Unfortunately I had a different angle...

    original.
    1s f/8.0 at 14.0mm iso100

    original.
    1s f/8.0 at 22.0mm iso100


    Note to myself: Have to reshot this next time, viewed today I'm not happy with these :Crunk:
     
  10. Ron, do you feel this lens has a different "base color" than your other lenses? Is this something you get a feel for over time and with use?

    Yes, I noticed a big difference in the overall light between your shot and mine. Also didn't know that about the aperatures, thank you, that's great for future shooting! :smile:

    I have since learned about stopping lenses down to get better image quality out of them. When I shot this, I wasn't thinking about that aspect of my lens, and I had also missed the fact that you used a 28/1.4 for the shot. I also can tell that you were a bit further down river (up river?) than I was, simply based on the angles of things. I got impatient with the rain/mist. :frown:

    Your lessons presented here are excellent and greatly appreciated!! Thank you! :smile:

    Edited to add: What an impressive difference the aperature makes on those lights. Thank you for taking the time to explain and demonstrate this!
     
  11. Excellent images from both of you, and a great tutorial from Ron! I'll have to remember this info next time I'm doing night shots. Very important.
     
  12. Michael,

    I really like that angle, looking through to the other tower. :smile: I tried some "on the bridge looking up" type stuff and didn't like the way it came out.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Tower of London Remembers Wanderlust and Travel Oct 10, 2014
The Leaning Tower Wanderlust and Travel Feb 20, 2013
Tower Bridge-Sun Kissed Wanderlust and Travel Aug 21, 2011
The towers of Notre-Dame Wanderlust and Travel May 17, 2010
Tower of London Guards Wanderlust and Travel May 16, 2010