Jeffrey pine and the Milky Way, Yosemite NP, CA
We conducted two more workshops last week, our second editions this summer of the Inside Bodie and Starry Skies Adventure workshops. We had a lot of fun once again, with great conditions and really nice people.
I made this photo on the first night of our Starry Skies workshop near Olmsted Point in Yosemite. Several members of our group and I framed views of this photogenic Jeffrey pine with the Milky Way and Half Dome in the distance. We made some exposures with just starlight, then tried to light the tree with a flashlight. Later we did some more complex lighting, but I ended up liking this simple version with just one flashlight aimed at the tree. We used a homemade snoot on the flashlight to narrow the beam and prevent too much light from spilling onto the rocks below the tree.
As I discussed in a recent post, with really wide lenses you can use slightly longer exposures without the stars becoming streaks. Here the focal length was 16mm, and my settings were 30 seconds at f/4, 6400 ISO. Although I frequently make separate exposures for the sky and light-painting in situations like this (and then later blend those exposures together), this wasn’t one of those times – it was just one frame, with the lighting added during the 30-second exposure.
I’ll post more images from our workshops soon, but look for a new photo critique tomorrow!
— Michael Frye
Michael Frye is a professional photographer specializing in landscapes and nature. He is the author or principal photographer of The Photographer’s Guide to Yosemite, Yosemite Meditations, Yosemite Meditations for Women, Yosemite Meditations for Adventurers, and Digital Landscape Photography: In the Footsteps of Ansel Adams and the Great Masters. He has also written three eBooks: Light & Land: Landscapes in the Digital Darkroom, Exposure for Outdoor Photography, and Landscapes in Lightroom: The Essential Step-by-Step Guide. Michael has written numerous magazine articles on the art and technique of photography, and his images have been published in over thirty countries around the world. Michael has lived either in or near Yosemite National Park since 1983, currently residing just outside the park in Mariposa, California.
Stunning as usual.
Thank you Denise!
I like it a lot. There’s an emotional tone to your starry skies/light painted images that’s really evocative, though I can’t quite put my finger on the right words for it. Not quite eerie, but close…
Thanks very much Eric! If any kind of emotional tone comes through I’m happy. 🙂
Question- if this were a two hour time lapse sequence, how long would you shine the light on to the tree during the two hours? Would you just flash it, keep it on (probably blowing out the picture), or what?
Dale, I’m not sure if you’re talking about a time-lapse movie, or a star-trail sequence. If it was a time-lapse movie then it would depend on the effect you wanted – whether you wanted the light for the whole time period, or only part of it. If you’re talking about a star-trail sequence, then you’d only want to shine the light for a short period. Typically I would do any light-painting in a separate frame (or frames), either before or after the star-trail sequence.
I am talking about a time lapse sequence of 500-600 images processed in LRT4 Timelapse software by Gunther Wegner. I would want the light for part of the entire period, but am afraid it would blow out the image altogether.A flashlight would not last 2-3 hours anyway. Recently I tried a time lapse star trail nearby a road. Every time the headlights came by, the trees were lit up in a flash.
Seems like the solution is a dim flashlight, and having a replacement light (or two) ready with a fresh battery.
Thanks, Michael, how wonderful to see a lovely high-Sierra pine, the Milky Way, and Half Dome, all together in beautiful blue and gold hues. The information about the settings and process is much appreciated.
You’re welcome Bob, and thanks!
Hi Mike : first off what a wonderful shot. At present I’m using canon’s 7D mkll with a Tokina 11-16 2.8 lens. My concern is the 7Dmkll ISO @ 6400 is not so good what settings would you have suggested I use in this situation? Thanks for all you do.
Thanks Dennis! You can’t use a wider aperture than f/2.8, and if you use too long an exposure the stars will become streaks. At 11mm you could maybe get away with a 25- or 30-second exposure. The stars will streak a little, but not too badly. At 30 seconds you could potentially use 3200 ISO at f/2.8, or maybe 4000. But at longer focal lengths with that lens you’ll have to keep the shutter speed to no more than 15-20 seconds to avoid star-streaking, which means using 6400 ISO at f/2.8. If you shoot at a lower ISO at 15 or 20 seconds and f/2.8 the photo will be underexposed, which means you’ll have to lighten it in software, which will produce even more noise than if you just expose it properly at 6400 ISO.
Thanks so much Mike you really explained my problem and my options. I do have other lens other than the 11-16 Tokina but their not as wide an aperture.
I love My 7D2 camera but it’s low light capability is less than stiller. I’ll work around it in the mean time I guess that’s what Lightroom is for.
Thanks again.
I like the fact that this photo is recent enough that I can readily identify Mars, Saturn, and Antares in Scorpio, just to the lower right of the center bulge of the Milky
Way on the southern horizon.
Thanks Owen!
Revisiting your wonderful photo, I am conflicted about the use of a flashlight to “paint” objects under the stars. On the other hand, your camera is sufficiently sensitive to pick up light pollution from the Central Valley as well! I’m sure as you were taking this photo, you had no indication that light pollution was being achieved on this image.
Auto correct has hit once again! The word “achieved” in my last sentence above should be “archived”.
No worries about the typo, but why are you conflicted?
Well… by “flashlight painting the Jeffrey Pine, a most unnatural, albeit impressive, image is produced in the most natural of settings. I think I might prefer a most minimum use of flashlight painting, turning the Jeffrey Pine into a ghost-like image, or perhaps no light painting at all, unless the source of light is the moon. Call me a purist if you wish. But, it’s a great photo nevertheless.
Thanks for clarifying Owen. Everyone brings their own esthetics to viewing a photograph, of course, and for you the addition of a manmade light ruins it for you. Obviously I don’t feel the same way. When I first started doing night photography over 20 years ago I realized that moonlit photographs looked too much like they were taken during the day – they lacked the nighttime feeling, the feeling of mystery, that I felt when I was there. Then I started adding my own lights to the scene (mostly using flash in those days), and that gave the images the feeling of mystery I was looking for. So while the technique might not have been “natural,” the feeling in the resulting image was more authentic, or at least more of what I was looking for. So I’ve been doing light painting ever since. Light painting, in some cases at least, serves my artistic intent and vision. I’m always up front about how the images are made – I’ve never tried to lead anyone to believe that the images were taken with natural light, even if the lighting isn’t obvious. I hope people can enjoy them on that level, but I certainly don’t expect everyone to!
Michael, light painting didn’t “ruin it” for me. I think your image is artistically first rate. Your use of an artificial light source to light paint, however, produced within me conflicting emotions, especially for an amazing scene that otherwise emphasizes the beauty of a dark and starry night in a nearly complete natural setting (excluding evidence of light pollution from the Central Valley of California). Thank you for following up.