>Nocturnal photography (also referred to as night photography) refers to the practice of taking photographs outdoors between dusk and dawn, when natural light is minimal or nonexistent.>The low-light conditions night photographers work in require specialized techniques to achieve proper exposure, including long exposures—ranging from several seconds to days—higher ISO sensitivity, or artificial lighting.>The genre encompasses a wide range of subjects, including urban and rural landscapes, architecture, industrial sites, and astrophotography.Post your night photos!
>>4509597Filmslop and also I hate Delta 3200, this shit is ass.This was shot on 1/60th handheld (50mm lens), focus on camera was fine but it still looks blurry and ass.
>>4509653Same set up.Delta 3200 is so grainy and fuzzy it just ruins any detail. These were quick shots to finish the roll, I had brought it to Stockholm for photos of the metro and military museum so didn't do a lot of night photos with it. Not a fan of the ones I did take.
>>4509597Just gotta drop a schizo post, sorry. 100 % convinced dogman actually exists. No way I’m shooting in the middle of the night. Stay away from cemetaries, woods, caves, desolate roads, fields (like corn fields) or honestly anywhere that isnt a well lit busy place at night hours. Left our national church due to monthly cut from my salary and being non-religious, same day I crash with my bike and sprain my ankle. Never sprained or broke anything before. Parents drove me from the hospital to our rural vacation cabin, and as we were going on a dark country side road all of a sudden some big dog or canine animal just sat on our side of the road, forcing my father to swerve to avoid crashing with it. Dark grey/black fur, huge beard, elongated head. Yeah I don’t know man, cant say what it was im just not going out with the camera at dusk/blue hour/dark unless in a city centre.
>>4509669Maybe I'll run across this Dogman character while I'm out in the mist one night... and the only record will be my camera, smashed against the pavement, his visage preserved in a shaky, blurry photograph...
Fresh off the pressesJust took this like 4 hours ago
>>4509870Nice. Any paranormal sightings to report? I went out last night and shot street lights and such on a roll of film, excited to see the results. It's being developed at the lab now. I bought a cable release so hopefully that will help my future nocturnal film shots.What's your process? Digital or film? You take a tripod? Any other accessories or gadgets you find useful or indispensable? I do have a headtorch but I don't make as much use of it as I could, I usually rely on my phone torch.
>>4509871>Nice. Any paranormal sightings to report?Nah, just cars fucking up my shots>I went out last night and shot street lights and such on a roll of film, excited to see the results. It's being developed at the lab now. I bought a cable release so hopefully that will help my future nocturnal film shots.Very nice.>What's your process? Digital or film? You take a tripod? Any other accessories or gadgets you find useful or indispensable? I do have a headtorch but I don't make as much use of it as I could, I usually rely on my phone torch.Digital, nah no tripod, I need to get one though so I can take exposures and get less noise in my night photos
Budapest, first time with a DSLR
Fresh from last Saturday!
local high school at night
portrait of a drunk
>>4509954nice . the smoke really makes it. although it stil feels like there is an awful lot of space to the right
>>4510431this one feels like a movie frame
Taken during a dust storm that rolled in after sunset
Almost an hour before sunrise. ISO 25,600.
>>4509870Very nice shot
how do the people in this thread make night photos have good quality despite low light conditions? what are the tricks you use?
>>4511262It's this really difficult technique called buying a tripod and setting a deep DoF.
>>4510431>S>E>Xlmao
>>4511262it's really as simple as a long exposure and some way to steady the camera (a tripod or IBIS)BRO TIP: when using a tripod, use timed shutter release or a shutter cable to prevent camera shake!
suburbs, midnightfeedback welcome
>>4511262IBIS and a fast lens. Stand still, shoot at like f2 or f1.4 and 1/15th of a second. Drag the shadows up a little in post. On modern cameras it's really easy. Use a tripod if you want even slower speeds and lower iso.
>>4511283>Use a tripod if you want even slower speeds and lower iso.Or deeper focus than faster apertures allow...
>>4511284Yeah good point
4AMfeedback welcome
cool carfeedback welcome
the neighbour's placefeedback welcome
>>4509653That is really grainy for delta 3200, what did you do to it? I attached an image of Tri-X at 6400 for refrence.
>>4511550Another from the 400TX at 6400 roll
>>4511552Kpan 400 at 1600 (medium format), this was a longer exposure and wasn't handheld as opposed to the TriX shots which were both handheld.
>>4511552>>4511553the contrast on these is so lowblack is just a somewhat dark gray I like the composition on the second, a good example of effective centre framing that really makes the place feel like it's in the middle of not just nowhere but non-existence. the graininess and faded image quality aid that too.>>4509654this composition is so good it carries the low contrast and grain on its shoulders. it's very layered: the grass, the road, the fence, the lights, then the statue and building like crowns.
S block, midnightfeedback welcome
>>4511550this one's hypnotic, so much suggested movement and actually much better contrast than your other two. it's swirling and swirling, very nice effect.
>>4511558Light pollution ruins nighttime shoots for me a lot :(, I rarely get a truly black sky unless I'm far from the city. And my scans don't do these type of shots much justice.>>4511561Thanks!
aetherial feedback welcome
business districtfeedback welcome
bush nightmarefeedback welcome
Yesterday went on trying a couple of night photography. It was raining so it was hard to hold the camera still and hold the umbrella lol Also, wanted to get the top of the house on frame, but the vf is shitty while using glasses and it’s raining.
>>4511780crazy how such a small detail RUINS an otherwise excellent pic, i feel bad for you son>it was hard to hold the camera still and hold the umbrella lolit's been raining heaps the last few days and I' considering going out with umbrella, I just can't imagine how I'd actually make it work. I need two hands to manipulate the tripod I have. I could hold the camera in one hand and umbrella in the other, skip the tripod, but that does come at the cost of some image quality... and that's really the whole point.honestly this kind of picture would be an excellent use for generative AI - let it put the apex on the house, clone the sky and boom, pic is saved.
>>4511783It was really disappointing get home and see that tiny bit missing on the top of the house… I liked the outcome but still feels that it misses that part lol> it's been raining heaps the last few days and I' considering going out with umbrella, I just can't imagine how I'd actually make it work.Basically, I was holding the umbrella between my left forearm and the body and supporting with my head lol as I was taking the picture with the camera holding thigh against my forehead. That’s another reason why I couldn’t see well through the VF
>>4511780I’ve took other 4 photos, I’m going to post. They are floating on the grading, I’m experimenting on it as I’m not used to photograph at night. Any suggestions and opinions are welcome. Thanks!
>>4511803
>>4511803>>4511804
>>4511803Last one
>>4511805Your photos are nice, I like this a lot.
>>4511893Thank you! I’m looking forward on going out at night to photograph
the beemer fixer upper
>>4511809>>4511205>>4510791I see we all have the problem of blurry ass foreground when shooting at these wide apertures, how do we solve? Crop it away or closer focus? Or maybe you guys like that look
>>4511999I guess the low light forces to use a wide aperture. Probably, if using a tripod you could close the aperture and use a lower shutter speed and more things would be in focus. I guess could be one of the reasons. Also, the foreground could suffer a little more from shaking, as it would be more perceptible.
Basic tourist-posting
>>4510804KINOOOOO
>>4511313Very nice, maybe just a tad darker and really sell that isolated light
Do you actually need a big FF DSLR for this kind of photography, or is it genuinely fine with any modern camera and skill?
>>4513010In order of benefit>tripodDepending on how far you want to go, you can turn apsc into better than GFX>good IBISIn practice, can get me 5ish stops over simply handholding>faster lens1-4 stop bonus depending on what you're comparing, but limited by what DoF you want>sensor size upgrade 1-2 stop bonus depending on what you're comparingFF with good IBIS and a fast lens is the best practical option, but if you are willing to use a tripod, basically any camera will do
>>4513023>tripoda fools game, ranges from frowned upon to explicitly disallowed, makes you a target, and it cant make a shitty camera better because the better medium format camera will just shoot at iso 100 (64 equivalent) and still have the 100mp advantage covering aliasing resistance and noise reduction/sharpening quality. frequent use of bracketing just to race to the stupidest way to take a photo. >good IBISblurs edges <35mm>faster lensshooting wider works if shit is further away, but most fast lenses are not corrected to shoot landscapes and city skylines at a true f1.4. only high end full frame and medium format primes do this. and maybe five crop lenses that cost $1500. >sensor size1-2.5 stops of photon shot noise, better color depth and shadow recovery, assuming progressive improvements. equivalence is only theoretical and select ff models will expose brighter at the same settings as well. but older and video-centric full frame cameras can actually have worse noise (other than PSN), color depth and shadow recovery than select crop sensors, so you cant just blindly buy the newest canosnoy or the older canikon and hope for the best. the actual secrets to night photography:1 - Just underexpose retard2 - Go to a city thats so bright squinty eyed people can get around unaided3 - longer lenses take brighter photos with the same subject and camera position4 - zooms typically take darker photos than primes
>>4513045obvious bait
>>4513046Im sorry but there’s no magic purchase and most of the night photos you think are cool were shot with 800 speed film, handheld. Just go somewhere with lights, underexpose, dont use a zoom, and stay away from wide angles unless wanted because they actually gather less overall light from further away. Needing medium format, a super pro tier fast prime, 8 stop IBIS and shit is for exposing night as day and improving sharpness and documentary value for shitty soulless commercial photography. Ill say it againmost of the night photos you think are cool were shot with 800 speed film, handheld
>>4513045>makes you a targetwhat does this mean
>>4513063Are you going to fight off boris the bear when he grabs your tripod and $2000 crop cope machine, and is set to beat you with it? Nope. He is hopping on his electric bicycle and fencing it for meth money.
First time posting on /p/I only have my phone camera so excuse the amateur-ish-ness
>>4513048better bait
black and white stairsfeedback pleasethoughts?
eerie housefeedback?thoughts?
barber shop
footy practice
the trendy bar
going through some old hard drives, a few night shots from a decade ago
>>4513188
>>4513189
>>4513190
>>4513191not quite the nocturnal vibe but close enough imo
>>4513192last one, thread has inspired me to go out at night again, eventually
>>4513193
>>4513219daytime, but same vibes
>>4511550Developed by a lab so dunno but I trust the lab enough. I shot it at 3200 so I think it would be pushed? I did mention this to the labI expect pushed film to be grainy don't get me wrong, but it's retarded for Ilford to call it a 3200 speed film if it can't produce good results at said speed with their dev instructions. >>4511558Thank you Anon, I did actually try editing some others on the roll for contrast but it ends up looking like receipt paper.>>4511560I like the opposing light colours and shadows (negative space?) but I'd personally have aimed the camera down more. The image feels like I am craning my neck upwards where perhaps stepping back or not capturing the whole building may have been better. I'm a sucker for "low key" lighting so overall nice.
>>4513190I like this one although the fog effect could be toned down>>4513191Not much you can do about this, but this would be pretty great without that big pole on the left
>>4513262>I'd personally have aimed the camera down more.I get what you mean. Including a little more detail of the road and sidewalk would be more interesting than dark sky.
the stallion
the mist, midnight
Went out yesterday to practice a little and experiment with the shutter speed
>>4513399
>>4513400
>>4513399Last one
>>4513220another
here's an old one. i'm inspired to go out and try some tripod shots. especially since nighttime is the only time it's a bearable temperature this week
I missed the mist last night, I was in my jammies and didn't realise it was so thick until about 10pm... been waiting for it, I'm devastated.
>>4513960hm it's harder than it looks..
>>4513973this is a pretty good shot actuallylooks really clean, not too brightit just needs a subject, like some peoplebut don't take that suggestion too seriously,since I almost never get people in my photos
>>4510431>>4511264LMAO, great shot
>>4510662Kino
>>4513400like this bc of the blue vibe and the light rails/street light bloom. the traffic cone is a nice touch and goofy.
>>4513402love the blue vibe here too, and there's pretty nice sharpness in the details on the facades. the shopfront is also clean, not clipped.
>>4513709i don't like it, the foreground is too bright for my taste. what were you going for with this one? is that how you wanted it to look? or did you want it to be darker, moodier, more noir?
Pics with my mobile phone always come out as supernatural glow effects when photographing any kind of light source
>>4514956Glow doesn't seem all that bad or even unusual sen-pai
Could this be the "bleakrooms", but from outside? The blackrooms building itself.
Heavily expired T-Max 400, I had no idea how it was stored so I just winged it and shot 8s at f8 and threw it into Rodinal to see if anything comes out of it. CBA to burn and dodge on test shots.
>>4509870This looks very clean. I'm a total noob here just browsing this board. But whoa this is nice quality
>>4516536 When I shot expired TMAX it curled up so much it was almost impossible to scan
>>4516619I don't really scan my negatives so it doesn't bother me too much but I did have to leave the cut roll under pile of books overnight to even get it in sleeves.
have you ever tried to shoot bats
>>4513161Looks like ultrasound. Intentional movement or happy accident?>>4516870Nice one.
4chan post thing is a fuck had a hell of a time getting the file size right
>>4518092try resizing your photo newfagno one’s monitor is 6000 pixels long or 4000 pixels wide
>>4516938>Intentional movement.I did move the camera intentionally, yes, and for anyone trying out ICM themselves, know this: less is more.
>>4518092Just resave it as a .jpeg
>>4510431köttbullar
>>4518401>Köttbullar are traditional swedish meatballs.QRD? I need an interpreter.
nightfags, for what do you expose? I'm a newfag and best I came up with is point meter to the brightest thing like a lamp and overexpose by like 2 (my camera only shows scale to 2 and if you're over 2) so it's not blown, and surroundings are still dark cause I don't want a bright night photo
>>4513065Note: this is only a problem if you live in the Eastern Bloc, Detroit, downtown Nashville, New York, SoCal, Toronto, Vancouver, London, or Florida.If you live in a civilised part of the world, then yes you can use a tripod at your discretion.
Hi everyone. First of all, thanks for the thread—it’s exactly the kind I love. Could some of you please give me some feedback on my photo? I have a lot to learn, and I know there are so many people who are talented both in theory and in practice, so if you’re willing to share your insights, I’d love to hear them.
>>4509597I like the composition but the veil spoils the pic.>>4509730Love the foggy vibe.>>4509870I don't appreciate how you managed the colors but you sure grasped something nice.>>4509942Love it, could use some contrast and darker shades>>4509954Changes from tje usual city sights, lovely
>>4509597
>>4525820the colors in your pic are great, but the composition is all over the place. it seems like you wanted to center a light but that's not perfectly center. there's a random building to the side, and i can't see where the end of the objects you feature at the edges of the picture- they're just cutoff. the story your photo tells is incongruent and contrived- it feels like i'm walking down a sidewalk, but i'm forced to look in a very odd direction.if i were you i'd take another pic at this location, but go down the sidewalk and commit to taking a pic with the light AND the building in one frame. or you could try taking a pic of the light and an object from a low angle to add a sense of height. focus on telling a story with a picture.
>>4525943You put words on what seemed off when I looked at this pic. I couldn't wrap my head around what exactly spoiled what I tried to do. As you explained, I wanted to tell something, or at least to capture something, but you clearly explained why I failed. Your feedback is greatly appreciated, thanks a lot.
Any tips on capturing cats handheld from a few metres away at night? Sick of my phone's inherent limits, what do you think of a first timer kit of a 56 mm f/1.4 lens on an APS-C body? I want to have a very portable setup I can take anywhere. Do I need IBIS?>>4511805>>4510431>>4513960my favorites
>>4533238get a full frame camera with an 85mm f1.8. it would gather more light and have better photon counting abilities.85/1.8 > 56/1.4better yet many third parties like sirui and samyang make sharp, cheap 85mm f1.4s for less money than aps-c 56/1.4s85/1.4 >>> 56/1.4no you dont need ibis unless you want to focus on sleeping cats. cats move. it can be hard to get a sharp shot of a cat under 1/125.
Anyone like this image? I really like the roof of the tunnel and the silhouette
>>4533680Can't see shit tho...
I tried my first nighttime long-exposure shot about a month ago. 10 seconds at 200mm, f/9.5, and Canon's version of ISO100.
>>4533931I can't decide on which crop I prefer.
>>4533931>>4533934i like the first one but the second pic is easier on the eyes
Bokeh and bottlebrushes
I live so rural that we only have a couple of street lights and they are not even on throughout most of the night. Sucks because I love this type of photography.
>>4513045>shooting wider works if shit is further away, but most fast lenses are not corrected to shoot landscapes and city skylines at a true f1.4. only high end full frame and medium format primes do this. and maybe five crop lenses that cost $1500.Don't know the science behind this, but I splurged a while back and got the RF 50mm F1.4 VCM lens and decided to test it after dark and noticed how buildings and such at a distance was very sharp compared to cheaper fast lenses I've tried. The whole "how does it look wide open at a distance" is something that is often overlooked.
>>4534028The source of the bokeh - someone has put their Christmas lights up early.
>>4534071you live in bortle 3 conditions ? take use of it then
>>4534674I was flirting with the idea of getting a cheap astrotracker, but the conditions have been less than ideal. Summer was nothing but rain and clouds, the few days without rain were humid and windy.. worst summer in at least 60 years and to make it even worse this trend continued into autumn with rain, grey weather and extreme wind when it did not rain so I didn't even get to take advantage of the beautiful colors. I will have to get into astro and getting a longer, fast telephoto for wildlife in order to not go insane.
I think I'd only recently at the time got the camera I took this with
>>4534071I don't even have street lights, Bortle 1 conditions are about a 30 minutes drive north of me, when I fix the 4WD I'll definitely have to go check it out.
https://github.com/brianm998/starry_timelapse_airplane_removerIf anybody here into astro timelapses, give this software a try. It removes airplanes, satellites meteors cars from your pucs and videosWorks quite well
From a recent 2500 mile solo trip
How do I into night time photography? I have sony a5000 with the stock lens.All the night photos i took looked terrible. Which settings do i need? Also, do i really need a stand or is it possible to do it without it( I'd rather without)?
https://4chan.org/rules#p3. (…) please post as much relevant technical information as possible, such as: camera, kit, lens, etc.4. Include a short description with your photograph, such as when and where it was photographed and under what circumstances.
>>4536415>Which settings do I need?IBIS, although if you actually want slightly blurry photos for creative reasons probably turn it off. >Also, do i really need a stand or is it possible to do it without it( I'd rather without)?It's possible but you will get different results. If you want to shoot handheld at night, turn on IBIS, set your ISO to at least 1600 (more if you can tolerate a truly noisy image), shoot wide open and hold the weight of the camera in your off-hand (i.e. the one not pressing the shutter button). That will reduce shaking from when you click the shutter. Hold your elbows against your ribs and breathe out slowly when you're ready to press the shutter. If you don't want sharp results from shooting handheld, nothing said above matters. Just make sure you are getting enough light in whichever way you prefer and move the camera for interesting results. When it comes to intentional camera movement, less is much more than you think: a millimetre of movement on a shift lens, for example, shifts the image a metre or more. Keep that in mind. If you just want a little blur but still a somewhat recognisable image, keep the aperture wide and use a shutter speed probably no more than 0.5"; shutter speeds past that really exaggerate light trails and blur the image.A tripod is really only necessary if you want the sharpest results of the highest dynamic range possible, since you can use the lowest ISO possible, an off-camera shutter release, even mirror lock-up if you still have a DSLR. If you do want the sharpest results possible, you have to use a tripod. There is really no other choice. I am speaking from experience: sometimes I would forego the tripod but still go out wanting sharp photos, and I would come home and be sorely disappointed.>picrelPhoto I took at night with a tripod using low ISO and a slow shutter speed.
I want to photograph in the moonlight with ektachrome, but it's hard to figure out the exposure when neither the camera or the incident meter register the light. Is this my best bet?-6 Nighttime landscape under quarter moon-5 Aurora borealis of moderate brightness-4 Nighttime landscape under gibbous moon-3 Nighttime landscape under full moon-2 Nighttime snow or beach landscape under full moon
>>4536622Do you know what reciprocity failure is? Ask google about it
>>4536415Take photos of things that actually have light shining on them and use the spot meter to select a middle tone in that area instead of using auto meteringEvery night photo you thought was cool was taken like this on a non-stabilized film camera with ISO 400-800 film.
>>4536681Of course I do. It doesn't matter if I don't know how many seconds to begin with. That table above are scene EVs for ISO 100 to spitball in the exposure.
>>4536687you know a phone app can meter in the dark right
>>4537060pspspspsps
>>4536607>Remove exif data so you don t get doxxed>Doxx yourself nigger, is the rule
Newfag here, how do I into night photography with my Olympus mju? Everything comes out blurry
>>4537135Too slow shutter speed. Your hands shake.
>>45371351Put your camera on the ground on a bench on a rock on a pole2Delay timer 2sec3Press button4Take your hands off the camera5????6ProfitOr buy a tripod to replace nr 1
>>4537136>>4537140Would swapping to a higher speed film like 800 help as well? I'm seeing conflicting info about it online
>>4537148I have no exp with film cameras but 800 iso i don't think is enough for handheld night photos. Will help but not too much
>>4537148Yes but ideally more. Alternatively, push process. I haven't ever done it but I know it's something people do with film. Instead of exposing your film at box speed, push the meter one stop above box speed, or more. For your ISO800 film, this could mean exposing at 1600 or 3200 ISO. YOU NEED TO TELL THE LAB.
>>4537148>>4537195800 absolutely isn't enough. I've pushed enough HP5 to 800 and it really only buys you enough room to keep your shutter speed high in poor daylight conditions. Fwiw you can push HP5 to 1600 and be fine, and I know some people go to 3200 but I think by that point you need to be real careful with your dev. Thing is, actual 3200 ISO film is expensive (even moreso if colour), so you're probably going to be all precious about it because of the cost. I'd say buy HP5 and push it two stops to 1600, and yes, if you don't dev at home you need to mark the canister with +2 so the lab knows to push the dev. If you dev at home Ilford provides charts for you to adjust your timings with.Do NOT push colour film. You WILL get colour casts, and potentially very bad ones, even from a +1 push. If you want colour night photography you absolutely need to just shell out for some 3200 ISO Kodak film or some shit and it's gonna cost you. 1600 ISO will likely be *enough* though.
>>4537135>>4537136>>4537140No. This is not camera shake. In camera shake, the image has double edges on object and especially light sources, or in worst cases visible strokes. Here, if you look at the Chinese letter, or the edge of most lights, you can see this is clearly not the case. The issue here, is that the focus failed on the highest aperture setting. Very likely, the camera was focused on its shortest possible distance, based on how blurry the result is. If your camera was set to autofocus, what probably happened is the scene was too dark and it didn't work. I don't know how much of a beginner you are so if this was not clear let me know.The other anons are not wrong that camera shake can affect night photos because the speed need to be set very low for chef exposure, but it is not what happened here.800 iso is not necessarily too slow for handheld night photography, but you have to use it correctly. If you can change the settings of your camera, always shoot wide open, focused to infinity (unless you have a specific subject to focus on), and at the closest speed from your focale (if 35mm, then 1/30). You need to hone your technique to avoid camera shake at low speed. Be aware old camera may be worn out and open longer than the setting shows, for example 1/20s when you set it at 1/30. So you might have to choose a higher setting. If we are talking about a point and shoot camera where nothing is manual you are cooked and must use a tripod. Also i'm not even sure most of those can be set to 800 iso, let alone 1200 or 3600.When you shoot 800 iso, don't expect everything to be correctly exposed, only the highlights will show. So it will work better if the ground is wet and is reflecting light, or if there is a lot a street lamps and shops, etc.You can shoot portra 800 or cinestill 800 as if it was 1200 or 3600, and then tell your lab to process it "pushed". But the colors will shift in unpleasant ways. B&W is king for night film photography.
>>4537252forgot to prove I actually shoot photos
>>4537254also this is fomapan 400 ortho, since it's orthochromatic it's not even really iso 400, and it's not pushed. Shot wide open at f4.5 and probably 1/15 or 1/30 with a 35mm lens, focused to infinity. So clearly yes with 800 iso you could shoot handheld, but it depends of how sharp you expect the final image to look and your technique.That's it, sorry for the triple post.
>>4537244>3200 ISO Kodak filmTMZ is pushed. It's meant to take the push well but it's not native 3200. The P in P3200 means push. I wasn't too impressed with the results, not too different from TMax 400 but maybe it was the development.
>>4537254Spill the beans anon, how do you get those flares that look like discs? It's not just bokeh
>>4537276kenko mc soft. But i'm not the anon who posted the b&w thread, maybe he used a different soft focus lens. But alsl he used kentmere. Preposterous.
>>4537095You're not important enough, cANON.
>>4537278Sweet. Kentmere is underrated btw, never bought HP5+ again after using it.>>4537282Not my post but he's right.
Thank you all for the advice!
>>4537311You've only ever taken a few photos of flowers and some blurry cows
>>4536198kino
