Any suggestions

[KyleJones]

Hi all. I went out and tried to take some nite shots of the Edinboro Lake last nite. The pictures came out exactly how I saw them, but from a photographic standpoint I consider them sub-par. I need them to just be brighter but without the washed out, hazy look that brightening with my Canon software seems to give. I'm shooting with an S2IS, and this shot was taken with the slowest shutter speed possible, 15 seconds. The camera controlled the aperature but I set the exposure comp. at 2 which is also the max. I keep the ISO at the lowest of 50 as much aossible. Kind of a last resort, you know? The house lites in the picture are across the lake and at least 100 yards away, probably 150 to 200 so flash is out. Any ideas? I really like how they came out but I do need some more detail in them. Thanks for anything, Kyle
Just looked at it again, and if you have a laptop/LCD screen and tilt it to the absolute brightest point, things are actually visible. Other than that it's puttin near black.

[KyleJones]

Here's the EXIF from the shot, directly copied from my computer:

Camera Model Name
Canon PowerShot S2 IS
Shooting Date/Time
9/4/2007 8:54:06 PM
Shooting Mode
Shutter Speed Priority AE
Photo Effect
Vivid
Tv (Shutter Speed)
15
Av (Aperture Value)
2.7
Light Metering
Center Weighted Avg.
Exposure Compensation
+2
ISO Speed
50
Lens
6.0 - 72.0mm
Focal Length
6.0mm
Digital Zoom
None
IS Mode
On
Image Size
2592x1944
Image Quality
Superfine
Flash
Off
White Balance
Auto
AF Mode
Manual Focus
Color Space
sRGB

[Reanimator]

way under exposed

i cant believe that its was 15 seconds exposure as i take night shots and 15 secs at 2.7 is plenty to get enough light

are u sure it wasnt 1/15th of a second ?

i looked at adjusting levels in photoshop and never seen histogram so far left....there is nothing that can be done with that shot as adjustments add so much noise its horrible

Gary

[KyleJones]

It's messed up, rite? It was definately 15 seconds. EXIF proves it. I did notice that on another shot I took that the color of the sky was actually more accurate- slightly orange- the flash was on. It was on low, but nonetheless on. I think the AWB adjusted for the flash being there, and therefore picked up more red in the shot. This of course gave alot more color to the water, thereby allowing for contrast and overall better recognition of what was in the picture. I will probably go back out again tonite and see if I can mess with it. Really hoping to see something cool this time that I can shoot. I'll probably go out alot sooner, too. Thanks, Kyle

[Reanimator]

just looked at exif on some of my night shots

10 secs, f7.1, iso 100 shot on a dark canal, sky is almost blue, can see blue in water and detail in buildings

so dunno whats wrong with yours

Gary

[KyleJones]

What are you using for a camera? I'm kind of curious/aggrivated that it didn't take as I wanted. I mean I could live with it being underexposed if there was something to the brighter side of the histogram, but there is seriously nothing at all. Only in the first quarter. Kyle

[Reanimator]

details

Make = OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Model = E-300
Orientation = top/left
Software = Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Date Time = 2007-09-05 22:42:48

[Camera]
Exposure Time = 10"
F Number = F7.1
Exposure Program = Shutter priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 100


as u can see it was late on the evening 22.48 so was pretty dark

Gary

[KyleJones]

I have to wonder if the camera was metering off a very lit area and therefore doing something.......hell I don't know. Maybe it was jus that there was no lite from the moon to speak of so the sky had no lite in it either. I'll work with it tonite. Kyle