# San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!



## btnphotography (May 8, 2013)

Here are some of my landscapes or cityscapes of San Francisco shot on a 5DIII and a 24-70mm f/2.8L. Hope you enjoy! Thanks!

EDIT: Thank you for the criticisms! Highly appreciated.  




San Francisco Glow by BTNPhoto, on Flickr




San Francisco Bay Bridge by BTNPhoto, on Flickr




San Francisco Golden Gate Bridge by BTNPhoto, on Flickr


----------



## serendipidy (May 8, 2013)

btnphotography

Beautiful photos! I love SF 8) Thanks for posting.


----------



## Click (May 8, 2013)

Awesome pictures. Nice job!


----------



## lholmes549 (May 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.



Really constructive criticism(!)


----------



## RAKAMRAK (May 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.



Ah everything aside, that is gonna put some minds and keyboards into hyper activity... 

And oh yes, is this forum really a place for posting "special" photographs, or is it to post "non-special" photos for getting helps, critics, and discussions going so that we can learn to ultimately take that "special" photographs?

(ah, my keyboard is in hyperactivity zone now)


----------



## Jura (May 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.



Envious? or just not got any in a while?

This is a place for constructive criticism which helps to develop the skills not only of the person brave enough to stick their photos above the parapet but for all those who follow the thread.
Now go and drink a camomile tea and dont turn your computer back on until you've learned some manners.

Personally I like the photos. As you say in the comments of the first shot a little more water reflection might have been nice but I like the overall tones and the stars add something extra for me too.
The second shot is awesome in terms of the reflections but I feel there's something ever so slightly awkward about the crop. I cant quite put my finger on it. 
I like the third one too. how long was the exposure. Might a longer exposure and a slightly more under exposed shot have given more reflection of the bridge itself in the water?

Thanks for posting ignore the morons


----------



## minim2 (May 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.



I just looked up your profile for more inspirational photos and found this one

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5334.msg103060#msg103060

I guess difficult for anyone to take this?


----------



## CanadianInvestor (May 8, 2013)

Nice shots and thank you for sharing. I know it is difficult to get a good vantage point, but the bridge has been truncated on your shots.


----------



## rpt (May 8, 2013)

Jura said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.
> ...


I like the second one because it makes the bridge look very dainty and elegant. I think it is the contrast of light and darkness that attracts me to the picture. Do you feel about the crop because it breaks the rule of thirds? I like it because it breaks that rule. I think the other thing is that a catenary is indeed a thing of beauty and this picture highlights that.



Jura said:


> Thanks for posting ignore the morons


+10,000


----------



## pierceography (May 8, 2013)

minim2 said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.
> ...



Ahahahahaha!

btnphotography, I really enjoyed the photos, thanks for posting!


----------



## spot (May 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.



Jerk!


----------



## Caps18 (May 8, 2013)

I was there last month, but was staying too far outside of the city to get any nighttime photos. Next time...


----------



## Deva (May 8, 2013)

minim2 said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.
> ...



Personally, I liked your photographs of SF - thank you for posting them.

Do you have any pictures of penguins, so we can make a fairer comparison to dilbert's work?


----------



## Northstar (May 8, 2013)

nice shots...i like the first one best. as someone else said, the second one seems like it needs straightening or a different angle.

thanks for posting!


----------



## 2n10 (May 8, 2013)

Love the shots and thanks for sharing. 

I think the crop, if you did crop, on number two cut off the right end of the bridge where it connected to land making it seem a little awkward.

Ignore the troll.


----------



## Jura (May 8, 2013)

rpt said:


> Jura said:
> 
> 
> > The second shot is awesome in terms of the reflections but I feel there's something ever so slightly awkward about the crop. I cant quite put my finger on it.
> ...



Looking again I think it might be that there's too much sky above the bridge for my taste and that has the effect of reducing the impact of the bridge and reflection... Perhaps its the small size of the picture. It might look awesome as a 40 inch print....


----------



## distant.star (May 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> lholmes549 said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Perhaps true, but then civility is a phase most adult humans eventually grow into. Stay on the path, and eventually you get there.


----------



## RAKAMRAK (May 8, 2013)

minim2 said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.
> ...



Wow, that is a penguin? It took me some time to understand, modernistic rendition of a penguin. Probably taking lots of penguin photos in low light will let that get out of the system too.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (May 8, 2013)

I think dilbert is close to saying the right thing, but saying it in the wrong way.

These are technically accomplished, but creatively sparse, you've nailed the magic hour technique, but with such an iconic landmark you really need a new angle to stand out. We've seen these before & we'll see them again.

I live on the west coast of Scotland and I am spoiled by some of the most beautiful coastal and mountain scenery in the world, and most of it fairly accessable. Which means that you'll have seen most of the landmarks, in HDR with ND110's at dusk, at dawn, with snow, etc time and time again.

There's nothing worse than seeing 1000x Colin Prior or Joe Cornish clones. Colin & Joe are masters. I'm not at their level, and neither are the dullards in scottish camera clubs who would be as well as working a photocopier than working a camera. I'll never attempt Black Rock for this reason. Folk have done it before, folk have done it better, folk more creative than me, or more willing to get the ropes out will get better angles than me.

Please don't be disheartened. They are nice images, striking colours, decent composition, capbale depth of field control, they display the ingredients you'll need to create striking brilliant images that folk will want to come back to again and again, just I don't think you've done that here. 

You could submit these to a library and they would probably sell pretty well, if thats any consolation.

I sincerely look forward to seeing what else you come up with in the future, I and hope you take my comments in the spirit intended. 

To those dilbert bashing, the place for sychophancy is flickr


----------



## MARKOE PHOTOE (May 8, 2013)

I personally like your style of portraits as seen on your Flickr pages. As we both live in the SF Bay Area I know these places well and sometimes its just not that easy to get there and be there at the right moment. But still, well done. 

Like all else mentioned, ignore the penguin. 

Keep posting your work. Maybe you should go to SF Zoo and share your image of what a real penguin through your lens might look like. HA!


----------



## rpt (May 8, 2013)

Jura said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > Jura said:
> ...


Yes I think it would. Like I said it broke the rule of the thirds. May be it needed to be taken with a shallower angle to the water to get some more reflection and then cut off some of the sky... Another thought came to me - the lighting is how we would have seen it so that may add to our liking it...


----------



## sleepnever (May 8, 2013)

Beautiful shots OP. Very nicely done.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 8, 2013)

I wondered how this thread ran up a high post count so fast - I was hoping for lots of images, instead it's just dilbert being a rude ass and the fallout from that. How disappointing. Dilbert, are you sure you know a good picture from a bad one? It's a bit more subjective than knowing the difference between a camera and a lens, and since you have trouble comprehending the latter, I question your ability to judge the former.

But back to the topic at hand (sort of, not a full cityscape but at least a long exposure in SF)...




EOS 1D X, TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II, 13 s, f/8, ISO 100


----------



## distant.star (May 8, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> I wondered how this thread ran up a high post count so fast - I was hoping for lots of images, instead it's just dilbert being a rude ass and the fallout from that. How disappointing. Dilbert, are you sure you know a good picture from a bad one? It's a bit more subjective than knowing the difference between a camera and a lens, and since you have trouble comprehending the latter, I question your ability to judge the former.
> 
> But back to the topic at hand (sort of, not a full cityscape but at least a long exposure in SF)...



Well, you've succeeded in demonstrating what a good picture looks like. That's a great shot!!


----------



## paul13walnut5 (May 8, 2013)

I would have taken it in the magic hour as the sky is just dead, and the light still looks a bit sodium to me - it's the predominant source, I know it's tricky to balance, but thats where PS adjustment layers and composite modes can help out. Even the 'replace colour' tool would have helped to cool down the other lights for a correctly balanced main structure. I also think the impact of the structure, the vertical repitition of the corinthian pillars is compromised by the bushes at the edge of shot. The reflections bother me too, that they are off at an angle, maybe a lower camera position with more shift, to me the amount of foreground suggest the camera was pretty much level with no shift dialled in, it's almost a wasted opportunity as half the frame is doing nothing, there's no interesting detail, no lead in. Compositionally the 'horizon' is pretty much dead centre. This is exactly the kind of shot where time of day and correct application of the kit can make an exceptional image, and that simply hasn't been achieved.


----------



## serendipidy (May 8, 2013)

Hey Paul....some good points, but the OP stated long exposure.

Neuro, I like your photo. I have taken some photos of it when I vacationed in SF. It's not always easy to get it right but I think you did a nice job.

from Wikipedia:Palace of Fine Arts 

The Palace of Fine Arts in the Marina District of San Francisco, California, is a monumental structure originally constructed for the 1915 Panama-Pacific Exposition in order to exhibit works of art presented there. One of only a few surviving structures from the Exposition, it is the only one still situated on its original site. It was rebuilt in 1965, and renovation of the lagoon, walkways, and a seismic retrofit were completed in early 2009.

It remains a popular attraction for tourists and locals, and is a favorite location for weddings and wedding party photographs for couples throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, and such an icon that a miniature replica of it was built in Disney's California Adventure in Anaheim.[


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 8, 2013)

paul13walnut5 said:


> I would have taken it in the magic hour as the sky is just dead, and the light still looks a bit sodium to me - it's the predominant source, I know it's tricky to balance, but thats where PS adjustment layers and composite modes can help out. Even the 'replace colour' tool would have helped to cool down the other lights for a correctly balanced main structure. I also think the impact of the structure, the vertical repitition of the corinthian pillars is compromised by the bushes at the edge of shot. The reflections bother me too, that they are off at an angle, maybe a lower camera position with more shift, to me the amount of foreground suggest the camera was pretty much level with no shift dialled in, it's almost a wasted opportunity as half the frame is doing nothing, there's no interesting detail, no lead in. Compositionally the 'horizon' is pretty much dead centre. This is exactly the kind of shot where time of day and correct application of the kit can make an exceptional image, and that simply hasn't been achieved.



Thanks for the comments, Paul. The camera was actually pretty low (tripod without legs extended, so less than 1 m off the ground. IIRC, it was at about +8 shift. The 'bushes' at the edge of the shot are trees across the lagoon growing directly in front of the columns (except for the branches of the bare tree that are above the columns) and in the case of one tree, the branches extend into the structure. Airport security wouldn't let me bring my chainsaw on the plane.  As for 'magic hour', I agree, but unfortunately the constraints of a day job precluded that (I was at meetings several miles south of SF until after sunset).


----------



## RGF (May 8, 2013)

Great stuff


----------



## PhotographAdventure (May 9, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.



I like them a lot. I need higher resolution to absorb the awesomeness.


----------



## Dylan777 (May 9, 2013)

Nice photos Mr. Nguyen


----------



## eml58 (May 9, 2013)

btnphotography said:


> Here are some of my landscapes or cityscapes of San Francisco shot on a 5DIII and a 24-70mm f/2.8L. Hope you enjoy! Thanks!
> 
> EDIT: Thank you for the criticisms! Highly appreciated.
> 
> ...



Hi BTN, I notice this is only your 4th or 5th Post, so not only were you brave to Post Images, but even braver to ask this Forum for Criticism, and as you have found out, the majority of people that involve themselves in the Forum, are dedicated Photographers of varying levels and only too willing to offer advise in any amount of ways to help other Photographers in a Positive way.

Some, like Neuro are not only accomplished Photographers, but exceptionally technical, Chaps like Gary Samples, rpt, Bdunbar79, serendipity etc etc, are a little of both, privatebydesign knows a huge amount about about Flash Photography, I've learnt heaps from these Guys on this forum, but.

You also have the Michele's and Dilberts, it's an open forum so you cant keep them out, if nothing else they do have humour value, albeit you need to develop a thick skin and learn to ignore the negativity of the down and outs of the world, they are generally born this way, so we need some compassion, and an occasional very large stick doesn't hurt, well I guess it does actually.

Onto the Photos, I love this City, one of my favourites after Florence, you've done an excellent job of exhibiting the City in your Photos, and like all Photographers, you have room to move your skill levels upward, I hope being involved with this Forum allows that to happen. I think well done & welcome to CR.


----------



## Dylan777 (May 9, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Anyone could have taken those photographs as there is nothing special about them.



-1....I can see your talent through photo below :-\ ;D


----------



## eml58 (May 9, 2013)

Oh, I did mean to mention.

Dilbert, from memory this is what Penguins look like, for future reference.


----------



## Dylan777 (May 9, 2013)

eml58 said:


> Oh, I did mean to mention.
> 
> Dilbert, from memory this is what Penguins look like, for future reference.



Thanks eml58 ...YEAP "this is what Penguins look like, for future reference"


----------



## yogi (May 9, 2013)

Remarkable photo Neuro! And love yours also btnphotography. Ignore the naysayers btn :


----------



## eml58 (May 9, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > I wondered how this thread ran up a high post count so fast - I was hoping for lots of images, instead it's just dilbert being a rude ass and the fallout from that. How disappointing. Dilbert, are you sure you know a good picture from a bad one? It's a bit more subjective than knowing the difference between a camera and a lens, and since you have trouble comprehending the latter, I question your ability to judge the former.
> ...



Your a very Funny Guy Dilbert, you've managed to insult everyone in this thread that's posted an Image, with the exception of your own image, very credible.

And it would appear you know about as much on the subject of "Fairy Penguins" as you do on Photography.

I originally come from Australia, I also Scuba Dive & do Underwater Photography, in the Southern waters of Australia, Fairy Penguins can be seen all day every day in their hundreds, if your close to Rocks & small Islands they're a PIA as they tend to surround you, all during the Day, you may be right about where they live "Under rocks", I wouldn't know about that as I don't live in that sort of neighbourhood.


----------



## serendipidy (May 9, 2013)

It's not a long exposure but here is one of the POFA taken Oct 2009 shortly after I got my first DSLR (Rebel XSi). I was such a noob that I only ever shot in program mode and jpeg. Kit lens EF-S 18-55mm @21mm, F4, 1/50sec, ISO 200, handheld and pp in image browser. I hope I have improved a bit since then and would like to try another shot with my 7D next time I'm in SF.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (May 9, 2013)

If you post stuff for a critique, then don't be dissapointed if you get one. Not everybody is going to absolutely love your stuff (unless you use flickr the home of facile sycophancy). Sometimes you are wrong. Sometimes they are wrong. 

If you are doing it for a hobby (like me) then it doesn't really matter, keep doing it your way and keep enjoying it.
If you are doing it for a living, then unfortunately the client is always right, or you aren't getting paid.


----------



## CanadianInvestor (May 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> I wondered how this thread ran up a high post count so fast - I was hoping for lots of images, instead it's just dilbert being a rude ass and the fallout from that. How disappointing. Dilbert, are you sure you know a good picture from a bad one? It's a bit more subjective than knowing the difference between a camera and a lens, and since you have trouble comprehending the latter, I question your ability to judge the former.
> 
> But back to the topic at hand (sort of, not a full cityscape but at least a long exposure in SF)...



Phenomenal!


----------



## Quasimodo (May 9, 2013)

distant.star said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > lholmes549 said:
> ...



+ 100


----------

