Balance Rock: Need some feedback!

[Esoterra]

While at arches I saw this nice sunset I am kicking myself in the pants because of my noobness. I was originally trying to take the shot with the sun as a round yellow/orange disk, but every thing I tried (different appertures extreme under exposure) ended up blown out and with no circular representation of the sun. Can anyone tell me how to take pictures of the sun at sunset or sunrise where you can actually see defined edges of the circle/sun ?? I used my Sigma 18-200 in this picture. Thanks for the feedback.

http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/8673/chrisross18yy.jpg

here is a sample of what I am trying to do as found on Google. This picture is not mine!

http://www.bali-direct-villa.com/images/photos/bali-sunset.jpg

[DFish]

Maybe a polarizer or ND filter? Just guessing though.

[Norm in Fujino]

I think the basic problem is that your sensor is being overwhelmed by the brightness of the sun. You either have to reduce the amount of light via aperture/shutter speed/ND filter (in which case the rest of the scene may become invislbly dark), or wait until the sun itself is a bit dimmer (lower on the horizon, behind some clouds, etc.).

[Esoterra]

technically speaking, what shutter speed and aperture would you recommend?

[Norm in Fujino]

technically speaking, what shutter speed and aperture would you recommend?

To be honest, I wouldn't know where to begin without being there to experiment and read the light with the meter. I do know that if I kept getting burned out suns like that and wanted the other kind of result, I'd wait until the sun had gotten dimmer or behind clouds, whatever, and try again. FWIW, I've shot similar scenes over the mountains, and gotten results similar to yours, but I used them for effect, as in this one:

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c197/Peregrinor/technical/P5161407sp01TM_fHw1.jpg

[DFish]

technically speaking, what shutter speed and aperture would you recommend?

Like norm said, you'd really have to be there to expieriment, but I would say an aperture of around f/15, and a shutter of about 1/60sec maybe with a low iso? Again, you really have to expieriment.

[Vich]

It's possible the photographer took 2 different photos on a tripod and layered them together - or shot RAW and created 2 JPGs after altering the RAW exposure. There's just no way to get that kind of Sun shot without a serious filter, and underexposing everything around it.

As Norm said, your sensor is completly overwhelmed. One has to wonder if your sensor or light meter can be damaged that way.

For exposure, I'd say always use manual. Take reading from your palm, clouds where they're getting dark, or better yet a gray card. Also shoot in RAW. Bracket the shot +- 2EV on tripod if possible, for possible layering in later.

Otherwise, I would like to see the correct technique for this too.

There's a wealth of reading on sunset technique. Here's (http://www.nicholsonprints.com/Articles/suntips.htm) one where the author has a shot like the one you wanted. His sunset gallery here. (http://www.nicholsonprints.com/Galleries/Suns.htm)

Something he suggests is hanging around for an hour after sunset. The look can be similar to what you're looking for. For example (please excuse the ISO 1600, mistake):
http://FLASHME.smugmug.com/photos/74516423-M.jpg

[Phill D]

That's a very interesting link Vich thanks for posting.

[Esoterra]

As Norm said, your sensor is completly overwhelmed. One has to wonder if your sensor or light meter can be damaged that way.

I have often wondered this myself, and asking has not gotten me a definate yes or no! I have just gone under the assumption that I see a lot of pictures out there with the sun directly in the picture, so if other profesional photographers are taking shots of the sun with their digital cameras, then

1. either is ok.
2. they have the budget to burn out a camera and buy a new one so they dont mind the risk.


I am going with option #1 lol.

If anyone has heard anything different speak up!

Norm- very nice photo you posted!

[Vich]

I have often wondered this myself, and asking has not gotten me a definate yes or no! I have just gone under the assumption that I see a lot of pictures out there with the sun directly in the picture, so if other profesional photographers are taking shots of the sun with their digital cameras, then

1. either is ok.
2. they have the budget to burn out a camera and buy a new one so they dont mind the risk.


I am going with option #1 lol.

If anyone has heard anything different speak up!

Norm- very nice photo you posted!

Or 3, they just didn't think about it,

Or 4, they used film.

[Norm in Fujino]

If anyone has heard anything different speak up!

Norm- very nice photo you posted!

Thanks. I should mention that if wider DR is what you're looking for, digital gives even greater potential than film. Take a look at a program called Photomatix or other exposure blending methods. You can blend multiple exposures, or develop multiple versions of a single RAW image and then blend them, producing far greater DR than you could achieve with the techniques available to most film users. RAW has really increased the potential in that sense.