Nights at the Airport

[dooda]

I've been shooting at the airports lately (vancouver as well as Seattle) and I'm finding that there are some amazing photo ops. Just take some of the strange roads that skirt the airport and you find the damnest things. Of course these are all taken with the Sigma 10-20mm. It's so much better than the kit lens, I think I need to get better glass for the 18-70 focal range, the detail and contrast from this sigma leaves it in the dust.









If you'd like to see them in larger, all four are at the front of my Flickr stream for the time being.
Critique and comments are welcome.

[tyrone_tong]

amazing lighting
I love the second and third one
What is those light in the sky

[Matt. K]

Dooda
Looks like Sci-Fi or another planet. It's amazing what the selective, creative eye can isolate from the landscape.

[dooda]

The first one in particular. I was framing through the viewfinder, and when I got rid of all the stuff on the ground, it looked like it was floating in space or something. I was cloning out a few of the tidbits from the bottom, and decided to leave the sign in, just to see if the irony of such a small little thing grounded next to a huge floating thing works. I might get rid of it later.

I think I like the fourth one best, as all the elements fit together well, those two lights look like eyes spying behind the tree, and the branches of the trees for some reason are so lively.

[BBJ]

Dave, fantastic images here, good to give the Sigma a plug as well and has made some very nice pics for you and i like them all.

[birddog114]

dooda,
You acted as a night owl.

[Slider]

Nice shots Dave. the 3rd one really has a scifi look to it

[stubbsy]

Dave

#2 and #3 work best for me, but they're all good. There is something about these that remind me of some of your other series - the building in the dark that looked like it was on fire and the one of (I think) piers and stuff.

[rokkstar]

Awesome shots Dave - the light is wonderful

[huynhie]

Great shots Dooda, if we were to do this in Australia at the airport some security guard will clobber us in the head

[johndec]

Amazing series Dave. #1 is my choice in a close race but it needs that sign in the bottom left cloned out. Then it would be perfect IMHO.

[daniel_r]

Amazing stuff. Wow.

[radar]

Great series Dooda,

love the sky in the third one,

Great,

André

[avkomp]

love the third one.
very close encounters!!

Steve

[ozczecho]

Dave all amazing shots. Hard to pick a favourite. From your commentary I can see that careful thought went into each composition. If I had to pick a fave it would be the last one, esp. after reading your commentary. Great stuff.

[wendellt]

Spooky surreal and beautiful, i like the water tank ones most, they remind me of a close encounter i had once

[Heath Bennett]

Tell us the story Wendell

These pics have inspired me onto an idea. If it pans out, expect to see something from me soon.

[Manta]

Beautiful work Dave.

Apart from the wonderfully hioghlighted subjects in these shots, the background skies are just sublime - #3 in particular! I absolutely love the overpass in #1; the bright colours juxtaposed against the stark, hard, industrial lines of the concrete structure. Fabbo!

[dooda]

Thanks for the comments everyone.

Heath, I look forward to see what you come up with.

FWIW, I never plan any of my shots. I take my camera with me when it seems like I haven't taken pictures for a while, and just keep my eyes open. It turns out that airports are a good place to do that. I was never actually in the airport space, but airports have really unique surrounds, strange overpasses, it usually is surrounded by wetlands, and is often close to some water body. There's always some cargo company that's gone under, or emptied warehouse spaces that sits waiting. Random roads that aren't really well known. I'd never actually venture into the airport area and do this.

[wendellt]

Thanks for the comments everyone.

Heath, I look forward to see what you come up with.

FWIW, I never plan any of my shots. I take my camera with me when it seems like I haven't taken pictures for a while, and just keep my eyes open. It turns out that airports are a good place to do that. I was never actually in the airport space, but airports have really unique surrounds, strange overpasses, it usually is surrounded by wetlands, and is often close to some water body. There's always some cargo company that's gone under, or emptied warehouse spaces that sits waiting. Random roads that aren't really well known. I'd never actually venture into the airport area and do this.

yeah dooda i like your choice of subject matter post industrial has a real feel too it, it's very niche and cool, excellent work

[rebel]

is that SeaTac tower? it looks like SeaTac...where do you live?
Edit, I guess that's a dumb question, maybe I should have checked your profile hah. I live near Paine Field here in Everett, but used to live in South Seattle.

[dooda]

Hello rebel, I live in Vancouver, but my wife is a pilot and occasionally flies into Seattle and can't catch a flight into Vancouver so I drove down this time and luckily brought my camera (and luckily it wasn't raining).

[SteveGriffin]

Dooda I just luv your work. For anyone that hasn't check out his Flikr site give it a look.
Do you have any tips for early time night photogs

[dooda]

I have tons of tips Steve.

It came fairly easy for me, the hard part is finding stuff to shoot. When I come across it I get all giddy. The next hardest part is getting to the spot where you put your tripod and there isn't stuff in the way or big huge lights glaring at you. Sometimes you have to figure out how to use them to your advantage, like I did in the SeaTac shot.

Of course you need a tripod, I find a nice light one that's cheap works fine, and easy to carry around. I've never thought "gee I wish I had a sturdier tripod". Though everyone says that you need one. I still haven't figured out why.

The next thing you need is a remote, as anything longer than 30 seconds requires it.

Once you've found your spot, and have your camera in place, it's pretty easy. I generally shoot at F8 (especially with the kit lens) but the sigma is sharper wider, though I do think that the detail at f8 is great.

So put it to the apeture that you desire, crank up the ISO to 1600, and shoot for about 10-15 seconds. Sometimes I turn off NR, (running out of battery or time). This way you can check your exposure in less than a minute. Look at the histogram. Is it over, under, or right on? If over, I'll go to ISO 200 and multiply the shutter time by about 5 or 6. If under, I multiply by 10-15. If it's right on, then multiply by 8. That's how I do it. It really isn't very hard. I like it when there's moonlight, but it isn't a requirement. I also like it when there are clouds moving through, but that also doesn't have to be. Always shoot in Raw. I can't stress that enough. Never ever in Jpeg for night shots. Image quality will suffer.

I personally have grown to hate any star trails that appear under 3 minutes. Short tales make no sense and distract from the scene. If it's going to be the case, I up the apeture and shutter time so they're less prominent, and longer (much more pleasing than short bright stars). Getting bright dots is terrific, but usually means you have to shoot wide open or at higher ISO's, which damage image quality significantly.

White Balance is usually on the cooler side, and tint generally to about 30-40 or so (in Rawshooter Premium). Sharpness definitely helps too.

Let me know if that helps, I'm more than happy to give anyone tips. I still sort of consider myself a hacker, but I also truly enjoy the process, from start to finish. Like finding a stone somewhere, taking it home, polish it, and shine it, and then on your shelf to admire.

[radar]

Thanks for the tips Dave,

will have to give that a try. There should be a few interesting spots around here

Cheers,

André

[wmaburnett]

absolutly stunning photographs i love them perfect skys! makes me wish i had a wider lens than an 18

[Oneputt]

Excellent work Dave. I too have this lens but cannot agree with your comment about the kit lens which I think is pretty darned good.

[Manta]

Thank you Dave for putting forward a comprehensive guide to how you get these dramatic results. There are a lot fabulous photographers around but not all are as open in sharing their expertise with others. I don't suppose they can be blamed if their livelihood depends on it but it really helps amateurs improve when the gurus decide to share. I'm sure someone once shared a few "secrets" with them...

It's all very well having people drool over your work and tell you how great it is but if you can give something back that helps someone get more out of their hobby then I reckon you've got winners all round.

Thanks again.

[Finch]

Dave,

I love shots 2 and 3 (especially 3) and the lighting effects are just sublime!

Cheers

Michael

[mudder]

Wow Dave,
These are bloody great, your compositional eye is working very, very well... It takes skill to make the ordinary seem fascinating and these are terrific...

#1, the combination of color is so vibrant, it's really catching, the sign at the bottom catches/distracts the eye and not sure if that's what you want or not, terrific lines in this...

#2 Sensual light...what's that streak across the bottom third of the frame, a power line or something? Tempted to clone that out...

#3, Again wonderful lighting, and a stunning sky backdrop. Do any dodgin and burning stuff etc?

#4, great foreground interest in the trees, I keep thinking there's someone (or something) in there, waiting, waiting...

Gee there's some sharp detail in these...

Thanks for posting Dave, really enjoyed these, you should be pleased with 'em

[dooda]

Thanks everyone.

Manta, I've always lived by the golden rule. I once asked a photographer who had some pictures at a beach in San Fransisco how he got this red effect (I was brand new, hadn't found this site yet). He ummmed and told me he'd rather not say. i found that so confusing, and in afterthought kind of humourous (it wasn't anything you wouldn't learn from reading Photography 101). As if the market is going to get saturated with red photos or something. I get a great deal of satisfaction with this whole process, and really sincerely want others to experience the same thing.

Mudder,
#1 I had a bunch of stuff down there that I cloned out. I left the sign (with the thought that I could clone it later) because it seemed sort of absurd in a good way. I'm undecided, but if I were to print this it would be gone for sure.
#2 that's a plane. I tend to leave those in because I'm not really good at cloning them, and I really don't mind it much (this was beside an airport).

#3 I rarely dodge and burn. I increased the contrast, tweaked the White Balance to get the red out of the clouds, but leave a little creaminess in them, and then adjusted the tint to keep the orange.

OnePutt:
The kit lens is pretty good and I rarely complained, and used it very often. When I shot at F8-f13, I always got things fairly sharp, but I was never ever blown away by the detail like what I get out of this Sigma. It's the first time I realized that investing in quality fast glass truly is the key to really high quality images, everything else being the same. I used to think that resolution had a larger impact, but I think that I was wrong in that.

Thanks again for the comments. I truly appreciate it. There's more from this night in my stream and they're all pretty good.

[flipfrog]

dave

what exact lens did u buy again? i forgot to ask you at bball last night (have a headache from gettin' smacked in the head btw) it sounds like it is night and day between that lens and the kit lens....

is it mainly sharpness that you find as the big improvment?

what did u pay for that sigma btw?

[dooda]

I paid $620.00 from Broadway Camera. It's definitely the cheapest superwide that you can get, and for the money it's spectacular. I do some business with the manager there, so they discounted me from the sticker price. They're pretty fair in general, give good service, and try and beat Lens and Shutter's prices.

Sigma 10-20 mm. F4 - 5.6.

It's very different from the kit lens, so it's perhaps unfair to compare. Where the kit lens' depth of focus is limited because of it's focal range, the 10-20's depth of focus is just massive from 10-15mm. I'd have to say though, I've never gotten the contrast and sharpness out of the kit that I do with the Sigma. One thing to be careful of, is that apparently there are some lemons out there (I heard that around here somewhere).

[flipfrog]

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses ... avigator=6

this bad boy right?
reason im asking is im in the maket right now for a new lens, not sure which direction to go yet...
aside from landscape, where else might you use this lens?

[dooda]

Anytime you want to include a lot of stuff in a close space. They're great for architecture and indoor stuff, because you don't have to back up much. Pretty much anytime you've thought to yourself, "I wish I was a little wider". Not sure if you've ever wished that, if not, one of the lenses I'm in the market for is the Sigma 30mm 1.4. Really high quality in a really useful range. It's a little pricey, but it's sharp as all get out. I just might get one of those when I'm ready.

[marcotrov]

Very SciFi like Dave. #1 and #3 are standouts for me. I think with the little sign in the bottom left margin cloned out #1 is awesome. Terrific lighting and exposure on all.
cheers
marco

[Alpha_7]

Awesome stuff Dave! Love them and they do have a surreal sci-fi style feel to them. Composition in all these shots are excellent!