The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
Once astronomical twilight ended and in the darkness of night I started this second exposure using my 14mm wide angle lens. The warm glow of twilight had subsided and now the only light was from the moon, which gave a much cooler color balance.
It was the same exposure settings as the previous phot with the 24mm lens, a 20 minutes long in a single exposure. I wanted more of the sky to show and with that a wider view of the how the stars move. On the right the circumpolar stars are showing how they revolve around the celestial north pole, in the middle appear straight along the celestial equator with oblique motion, and then arc in the opposite way south of the equator in anti-polar motion.
Specific Feedback
While I wanted a wider view for the sky, I was not particularly happy with putting the horizon directly in the middle of the frame, as I did not recompose the camera, I just switched lenses. In hindsight I feel like I should have tilted the camera up to include more sky and less of the immediate FG rocks and water. Does that detract from the image?
I was also not particularly happy with the relatively empty left side of the image or the encroaching rocks in the LRC. How do these two aspects sit with you?
I do like the transparency of the water allowing us to see the ocean floor beneath it.
Technical Details
Nikon D850, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 MF lens, set at f11, 20 minutes at ISO 100.
Processed in the same way as the previous image to enhance the stars.
Critique Template
Use of the template is optional, but it can help spark ideas.
Vision and Purpose:
Conceptual:
Emotional Impact and Mood:
Composition:
Balance and Visual Weight:
Depth and Dimension:
Color:
Lighting:
Processing:
Technical:
A very interesting followup to the first image! I think you are right that in this case more sky would be good. The different motion of the stars in different parts of the sky is interesting, and I would love to see the CNP / Polaris in the frame to show the circular motion there – albeit with lens distortion. For me, the immediate FG rocks on the right are not that important to this image and their brightness brings too much importance to them. I think the mid-ground rocks and cliff are a very nice complement to the sky. But kudos for pulling this off – I’d love to see a v2!
I generally agree with Dianne’s comments about the foreground rocks. Cropping across the bottom to remove them would give more weight to the sky and improve the left/right balance as the surf would balance the remaining rocks and would remove a large amount of black. I am not sure about “adding” the pole star as it could skew the balance back to the right. It seems this was a great night.
Thank you @Diane_Miller and @Rob_Sykes for the crop idea. I did not think about cropping as I wanted to show the anti-polar motion as well, but I think the crop works. I guess I am going back there on the next clear night to try this again with a composition more oriented up to the sky, and I will see about including the pole star as well.
Youssef: I’ve not done any long night exposures but this makes me curious and anxious to try in the right place and the right conditions. I think the crop is a net plus although I did like the original. Very nicely done. >=))>
@Bill_Fach, although Texas is huge, you are not that far from Big Bend NP and that is a good place for dark skies and interesting FGs. (Some very photogenic birds down that way, too…)
