Intro to Night Photography: Cityscapes — Focus, Noise, Exposure, Effects

At night in a city, virtually any city, the scene before you changes dramatically. In some locations the architecture and spirit of the city is merely enhanced, shown with a different, though recognizable look.

In other locations, the city at night transforms into a new place, sometimes brighter and more adventurous, sometimes more alive and mysterious.

Either way, making images of cities at night can allow you to often capture a “new city” with a different life than it has during the day. Making photos at night has its own challenges, but it's still subject to the same set of constraints as daylight photography; aperture, shutter speed and light sensitivity. The difference is, these constraints often push you and your equipment “to the edge,” compared to photographing the same city during the day.

Last week I discussed night photography trade-offs and constraints, the potential of star trails at times, and the equipment needed to produce high quality night photography in cities.

This week we'll get down to the nitty-gritty of actually making our night cityscapes. We'll talk about focus, noise and camera settings

Do filters for digital cameras make sense?

Before the advent of high quality digital cameras, professionals, and advanced amateur film photographers traditionally used filters to modify both the color and intensity of light exposing the film, as well as to generate special effects.

Digital cameras operate in a different world with respect to color. Photographers can easily modify color in their cameras, or during post processing in their computers, via controlling white balance for scene color accuracy or effect.

Warming, cooling, and filters which convert fluorescent light to look like daylight, may be required for film, but digital cameras can achieve the same effects by their internal manipulation of the image’s digital data.

The use of traditional photography filters for modifying the color of the light, is unnecessary for digital photography, but other filters can work well for digital photography.

Panorama Photography Part I

When you go to an exhibition of photographs, what type of photo always seems to be one remembered? It’s the sweeping panorama.


Panoramas of a scene seem to take the image to new heights. They make landscapes more dramatic and vivid. Mountains become more majestic. Horizons become more exciting. Even a panoramic style view of great architecture becomes more admirable. The above panorama, made from five photographs stitched together, taken in Monument Valley, far better represents the feeling one gets traveling among the Valley’s natural wonders than squarish photographs.

We’re used to seeing photographs in the typical 3:2 aspect ratio of width to height which started with the invention of the 35mm film format, and is carried through on today’s digital cameras, both the DSLR’s and Point & Shoot varieties. The most common print sizes of 5x7, 8x10, and 11x14, generally adhere closely to the squarish 3:2 ratio.

I think that part of the reason panoramas so appeal to the eye is their departure from the 3:2 format, and the easy way they draw your eye across their “canvas.” The appeal of Cinemascope, the first widely accepted “wide” movie format, is much the same. Cinemascope allowed movies to go to a 2.66:1 aspect ratio, twice as wide as the conventional format of 1.33:1. With Cinemascope, the breathtaking beauty of the background of some of the classic movies of the 50’s and 60’s and beyond was greatly enhanced.

Imagine what “Ben Hur” or “Lawrence of Arabia” would look like, reduced to a square screen. Without their wide screen aspect ratio, in my opinion, neither of these films would have won an Oscar for “Best Cinematography.”

You don’t have to limit your panoramas to landscapes, though they are the most familiar use of the wide aspect ratio photograph. Buildings, city-scapes, groups of people, and parades are all great subjects for panoramas. Isn’t this photograph of the Louvre in Paris at night made more dramatic by its wide aspect ratio?

There are two basic methods for producing a panorama photograph. The easiest way is to take a wide angle view of your subject and crop it to produce an image with a wide aspect ratio. This is how I produced the photograph of the Louvre above.

Some Point and Shoot digital cameras have a “Panorama Mode.” If your camera has one, use it. It will enable you to get some spectacular results with some practice.

The other method for creating a panorama photograph is to take several photos of your subject, moving your camera across the subject, being careful to overlap each shot, then stitch them together with an image editor on your computer. Both Photoshop and Photoshop Elements contain tools to stitch photos together, or you can use specialized software to accomplish this task. I use PanaVue Image Assembler for my multi-image panoramas. It allows me excellent control in creating the combination image.

While you can hand hold your camera to take multiple photographs stitched together into a panorama, I strong suggest you use a tripod. Using a tripod allows you to easily keep each photo in the panorama in the same horizontal plane. I use a special panorama head on my tripod for these shots, which makes leveling the tripod easier, and helps you rotate your camera a specific number of degrees between each photo.

While you’re looking horizontally to produce panoramas, there may be some opportunities for vertical panoramas too. Don’t loose sight of these vertical possibilities.

Don’t forget the “Rule of Thirds” when taking panoramas.

Take my word for it, or try it yourself. Placing the bay’s horizon in the lower third of this photo of the Hubbard Glacier in Alaska, close to the intersection of the lower third with the middle third, made this panorama much more pleasing to the eye, than if I placed the bay’s horizon across the middle of the photograph.

In Panorama Photography Part II, I will discuss techniques for taking your photographs for multiple image stitched panoramas.

Ten Tips to Improve your Landscapes

It’s Spring. We’ve had days in the 90’s and days in the 50’s, days it’s been sunny and days its poured and poured, days it’s been calm, and days the winds have gusted over 50mph. Such is spring in the Northeast, but it’s been so great to be beyond the grip of winter.

With digital point and shoot cameras and consumer DSLRs so easy to use to make high quality photos, the number of Philadelphian’s and visitors walking on the paths beside the Schuylkill River a couple of weeks ago, to watch and take photos of the shells rowed quickly down the River, and the beautiful landscapes of Fairmount Park’s flowering trees along the River was amazing.

As I watched the scenes revealed as I walked up the River banks, I thought I might discuss some ideas I’ve learned about making landscape photographs better, here on the Blog.

1. With film, there was a real cost per photo, so photographers gave thought to composing each one. With digital image costs at almost zero, that impetus for thoughtful image composition disappeared, and now too many travelers bring home too many poorly composed images. I see travelers so excited to arrive at their destination, that they start taking photos willy-nilly. Take a breath, take in the scene, then compose an image which shows off the scene well. That way you’ll make photographs, not take snapshots.


2. Maximize your depth of field (well most of the time anyway). Generally you want to ensure that as much of your image as possible is in focus. The easiest way to do this is to choose a small aperture setting. The smaller your aperture, the greater the depth of field in your photos. Don’t forget, a smaller aperture means you’ll need to decrease your shutter speed, or increase you sensor sensitivity (ISO setting) to get the correct exposure, or a combination of both.


3. Sometimes to help your image have a more natural look, and focus on an object in the foreground, or the foreground itself, you might want to narrow the depth of field. This can give the image a real sense of depth, and give the viewer a way into the photograph. I often choose this, to emulate the way we actually see a large landscape, by keeping the foreground and mid-ground of the image in sharp focus, but allow the background to be somewhat fuzzy. When we look at a scene and concentrate our eyes on the foreground, the background is generally somewhat out of focus.


4. Landscapes need some sort of focal point to avoid ending up looking rather empty. Focal points prevent your viewer’s eye from wandering, with no guidance of where or how to look at your photograph. Focal points can take many forms in landscapes from buildings, trees, boulders, birds, ships, islands, a person, silhouette, etc.


5. Consider using the sky to enhance your landscape. Many great landscapes will either have a dominant foreground or sky to eliminate your photo from being boring. If your sky is bland, compose your landscape to focus on its foreground by placing the horizon in the upper third of your shot (Remember my article on the Rule of Thirds.) If the sky is filled with drama, interesting cloud formations and colors, let it dominate by placing the foreground lower. You can even enhance skies via a polarizing filter or in post production.


6. When people think landscapes, they think of passive environments, still lifes, but many of the great landscapes show motion and the movement adds drama, mood and points of interest. It could be waves on a shoreline, a waterfall, moving clouds or birds flying, for example.


7. After you take that breath, while you’re composing your landscape image, one question to ask yourself is “How will you lead the viewer’s eye in the photograph?” We’ve already discussed some methods. Another is to provide viewers with lines that lead them into and through an image. Lines give images depth, scale, perspective and can be a point of interest, creating patterns in your image.


8. Photograph during the “golden hours,” the hours near dawn and dusk. This is the time when the light must travel through the atmosphere the longest distance, which effects it’s “golden” color. The light being low also creates shadow, and helps define shapes better with improved contrast, interesting patterns, dimensions and textures.


9. Think about the horizon in your landscapes. While you can fix the horizon in post processing it’s better if you get it right when you take the photo. Ask yourself if it’s straight, if it should be, and if it’s in the right place to make the best landscape possible. Think about that rule of thirds I keep mentioning. It works.


10. Remember it’s not the camera which creates great photographs. Photographers create great photographs with their minds, hearts and senses.

Destination: San Francisco city-scape photographs

I'm often asked where are great spots for taking city-scapes (you know, landscapes in cities) at the destinations to which I've traveled. I've recently returned from San Francisco, a favorite destination of mine, and have some suggestions for you.

There are two great spots for taking wonderful skyline shots of San Francisco; Coit Tower and Twin Peaks. In addition, the Presidio is a marvelous location for taking a skyline photograph of San Francisco, or photos of one of the most famous landmarks in the US, the Golden Gate Bridge.

If you're in San Francisco visiting these locations, or anywhere, visiting similar city-scape vantage points, don't loose sight that the trek to the location, or the location itself, may have wonderful photographic opportunities well beyond the city-scape, or landmark shots themselves.

For example, for me most of the fun at the Coit Tower was getting there. We purposefully didn't take a tour bus, a cab, or public transportation to get to the Coit Tower, probably the number one location for tourists trying to take photos of San Francisco's "downtown" skyline. We walked, or should I more correctly say, we climbed there.

We took the famous Filbert Street Stairs to the Coit Tower. On the right is a photo of some of the homes and gardens along the Filbert Street Stairs. The stairs aren't for the "faint of heart" but if you take your time climbing them and take periodic rests to turn around and look at the breath-taking views of San Francisco Bay, it's a wonderful walk. Take a look at my Coit Tower gallery which includes photos of homes and gardens from our Filbert Street climb.

Of course, once you arrive at the "summit" of famous Telegraph Hill, and take the elevator ($5 for adults) to the top of the Tower, the skyline views are wonderful, from the Embarcadero and skyscrapers of the Financial District, to Fisherman's Wharf and Alcatraz, to the Golden Gate Bridge.

I've seen reviews of Coit Tower which relate tourist disappointment with it, once they arrive. They were expecting something far more grandiose, than something which looks like a fire plug on the outside, and with a first floor which is mostly a "gift shop." The murals inside are lovely, but the Tower itself is not the reason to visit this San Francisco icon. It's the climb to the Tower and the views from it which make this attraction so worthwhile.

I had never heard of Twin Peaks until a terrific waitress mentioned it to my wife and I at dinner, when we asked her where she recommends travelers visiting San Francisco go, especially for photographs. Twin Peaks are two hills with an elevation of about 922 feet (281 m) situated at the geographic center of San Francisco, California. They form the second highest point in San Francisco, after Mount Davidson.

We got to Twin Peaks via a rental car, but you can get there by tour bus. There is no public transportation which takes you to the summit, but the 37 Corbett Muni line stops near a path that runs up the hills on Crestline Drive. As you can see by the photo, the views are incredible. Check out some of my other Twin Peaks' photographs in my galleries.

The Presidio of San Francisco (originally, El Presidio Real de San Francisco or Royal Presidio of San Francisco) is a park on the northern tip of the San Francisco Peninsula in San Francisco, CA, within the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. It has been a fortified location since 1776 when the Spanish made it the military center of their expansion in the area. It passed to Mexico which in turn passed it to the United States in 1847.

In a past article, Traveler's "must" photos - Shooting Landmarks I talked about the disappointment some feel when they get home and see their photos of famous landmarks, such as the Golden Gate Bridge. One of my suggestions was to scout around for a new vantage point. Take a look at the variety of looks and shots I've taken of the Golden Gate Bridge in my Presidio gallery at NSL Photography. In the gallery, you'll find eleven different and some similar views of the Golden Gate Bridge which I think exemplifies that idea. The photos are from different angles and perspectives. They include photos of the Bridge showing the beach and fort below, and the parkland above. It's almost amazing how different the Bridge can look. We drove to the Presidio, which I recommend as it's a pretty large place and you don't want your visit cut short by the schedule demands of a tour bus.

If you're traveling in San Francisco go to these wonder sites for your photographs. You'll be glad you did, and don't let the Coit Tower naysayers keep you away, but take the Filbert Street Stairs, enjoy the gardens and the Bay views behind.

Have a great trip. It's a great city.

The Rule of Thirds

There are principles of photography which when learned can dramatically improve your photographs, and help make them more consistently excellent. The Rule of Thirds, probably the most well known rule in photography, once understood can significantly improve how you compose your photographs.

The Rule of Thirds refers to the concept that the most eye-pleasing photographic compositions split the field of view into roughly equal thirds, whether you're holding your camera horizontally or vertically. It doesn't matter whether you're using a a typical consumer level point and shoot camera, or the most expensive professional digital single lens reflex (DSLR) camera. On some cameras the viewfinders have gridlines which will help you see the "thirds," but most of the time photographers must use their best judgment.

The Rule of Thirds is a compositional rule of thumb used throughout the visual arts. It's used in painting, photography and design. Specifically, the rule states images should be divided into nine equal parts by two equally-spaced horizontal lines and two equally-spaced vertical lines. The rule further states that important compositional elements should be placed along these lines and/or their intersections. The rule's exponents believe that aligning a subject with these points creates more tension, energy and interest than just centering the subject.

I believe the Rule of Thirds works much of the time, especially with landscapes, and cityscapes which we all run into when we travel, but it isn't the only principle of composition, and as we all know, sometimes rules are meant to be broken.

Various studies in the world of art have revealed that when people view images, their eyes naturally go to one of the Rule of Thirds intersection points rather than the center of the image, therefore when you use the Rule of Thirds you are directly using a person's normal way of viewing an image, instead of working against it.

The example photograph above is of Kicker Rock in the Galapagos Islands, off the coast of Ecuador, in the Pacific Ocean. That small white area along the water to the right of Kicker Rock is Celebrity Cruises' Xpedition. Note that I kept the ocean's horizon in the lower third of the horizontal plane of the photograph. I broke the rule to a point by putting the main part of the Rock in the center vertically, but it is along the left guide. The Xpedition is in the lower right quadrant.

Personally, I think the Kicker Rock photo opportunity cried out for using the Rule of Thirds, as landscape pictures often do. Keeping the water, for example, and its Kicker Rock reflection, in the lower third, allows the linear features of the image to flow from area to area.

Using any guidelines inflexibly is not a good idea. There are many situations in which guidelines or rules of thumb are better ignored. We should understand that the Rule of Thirds main thrust is to discourage photographers from placing the subject at the center of the image, or allow an image's horizon to bisect the photograph. Both of these would usually make for a mediocre or poor photo. When photographing people, it is normal to align the body with a vertical guide, and have their eyes align with a horizontal guide.

I hope you will experiment with the Rule of Thirds the next time you travel, and that you can use it to make your photos even better than they already are.

The DSLR Multiplier Myth Exposed

Last month, a friend asked me about purchasing a 300mm lens for wildlife photography with his Nikon D80, instead of a 500mm lens. He thought he could save some cash since the "300mm lens would give me the same magnification as a 450mm lens, wouldn't it?"

Before discussing the details, let me get the answer to his question out of the way, "It won't!"

What my friend was talking about is the "multiplier effect." Today's expensive professional level digital single lens reflex cameras (DSLR) have full sized sensors, meaning their sensors have the same size as a 35mm negative. Other professional DSLR's, as well as consumer oriented DSLR cameras have smaller sensors. Nikon calls their smaller sensors, DX sensors and their full size sensors, FX. When comparing lenses mounted on a DSLR with a DX sensor to a 35mm film camera, or a DSLR with an FX sensor we "multiply" the lens' focal length by 1.5, so a 300mm lens becomes a 450mm lens, or does it?

What's really happening is the field of view is being reduced or cropped. Cropping is the process of cutting part of an image out of a photograph to make the final photo. In the case of a Nikon D80 with a DX sensor, with a 300mm lens attached, the effective field of view is that of a 450mm lens. The photo is cropped, not magnified.

On the right is a view of Monument Valley through the lens of a DSLR. Inside the white rectangle is the image picked up by a full size, FX sensor. Inside the yellow rectangle is the image picked up by a smaller, DX sensor.

Note that the DX image is a cropped portion of the FX image. The field of view has been narrowed along both axises, horizontal and vertical. There is less of the scene in the DX image than the FX image.

Look at the two resultant photos on the right, below the lens view. Both are printed to the screen at the same size. The FX image is at the top, and the DX image is on the bottom.

If you examine them carefully you will find that the DX image appears more "magnified" than the FX image. That's happened because to print both photos to the same physical size, the smaller DX image was enlarged, to increase its size to the FX's image size.

This is where I believe the misunderstanding comes from, when discussing the "multiplier effect." Personally I think we would all be served better by eschewing the "multiplier" terminology and changing it to the "crop effect" and the "crop factor." If we used these terms from the beginning, I don't think anyone would think they could get more magnification from a 300mm lens than from a 400mm lens.

Now that we understand the crop (multiplier) effect, I can hear you ask, "So does the crop factor affect travel photography?" Yes it does, according to the situation. It depends on the type of photograph you're taking while traveling.

• If you're taking portraits, wildlife or macro photos then the crop factor won't be an issue.
• If you're taking landscape photos, or architectural photos in a crowded city, or indoor photos, the crop factor will impact your travel photography.

Often some of the most beautiful landscape photography has utilized wide-angle lenses to capture the scenery in front of the camera. As shown above, a DX based DSLR camera reduces, or crops the field of view. While a 28mm lens on an FX DSLR or 35mm film camera is considered to be a wide angle lens, it isn't on a DX DSLR camera. On a DX camera, the 28mm lens has the equivalent field of view of a 42mm lens.

This means that a landscape photographer using a DX DSLR needs to use extremely wide angle lenses to capture the same scenic panoramas as FX cameras. I use a Sigma 10mm-20mm zoom lens for my wide angle landscape photographs. It has the equivalent angle of view to a 15mm-30mm zoom lens which is a wide angle zoom lens specification in anyone's book.

If you've researched typical DSLR DX sensor based camera kits, I'm sure you've noticed that most come with a lens such as an 18mm-55mm zoom, which can provide a good angle of view for landscapes, architectural, and indoor photos. Now you know why.