[Christopher M.W.T]

I was thinking HDR at first but now i'm not so sure, to get the sun rays I'm almost thinking a fairly small aperture. And possibly a Graduated ND filter.

Any thoughts?

[spystyle]

I bet the lens had a polarizer and an ND filter and a color filter and a graduated neutral density filter and the image probably was HDR too.

I've seen cool images from stacked filters and long exposures before (click)

Are you able to e-mail the shooter and ask him ?

[Christopher M.W.T]

I bet the lens had a polarizer and an ND filter and a color filter and a graduated neutral density filter and the image probably was HDR too.

I've seen cool images from stacked filters and long exposures before (click)

Are you able to e-mail the shooter and ask him ?

Thats a beautiful shot, I never thought about emailing the shooter in the first place lol.

[spystyle]

It's been my experience that image makers don't mind sharing recipes

I bet he'd tell you the details if you asked nicely

[MJB DIGITAL]

I don't think a polarizer would work very well shooting directly into the sun

the starburst patter from the sun denotes a small f/stop. it was probably shot at a hyperfocal distance with said small f/stop since everything from foreground to farground is in focus.

this might be a blend of exposures but i can't comment on that because i don't like doing it.

if it's not, then he shot within his cameras dynamic range to be able to pull the shadows up to reveal the terrain through the sunset...

my .02

[interested_observer]

The detail is too well defined for stacked images, or for a long shutter. This is the type of image I endeavor to take. If your able to find out, please share!

[twitch]

The water is far too sharp for it to be a long exposure.

I think it is a very small aperture (f16+) and very good PP (shadows, highlights, selective sharpening, saturation brushes and god knows what else).

It's not hard to get skys that look like that with PP, what's impressive is to get that sky and have a well lit foreground. It looks like perfect exposure with good PP including excellent noise reduction.

EDIT: actually it could be a GND

---

Last edited by twitch; 05-12-2010 at 08:40 PM.

[Adam]

The water is far too sharp for it to be a long exposure.

I think it is a very small aperture (f16+) and very good PP (shadows, highlights, selective sharpening, saturation brushes and god knows what else).

It's not hard to get skys that look like that with PP, what's impressive is to get that sky and have a well lit foreground. It looks like perfect exposure with good PP including excellent noise reduction.

EDIT: actually it could be a GND

I tend to agree. There is too much contrast for it to be an HDR image.

I'd say either GND or polarizer, plus some very good post-processing.

[Christopher M.W.T]

The shooter has confirmed that he just used an ND-8 filter.

[Christopher M.W.T]

and a Nikon 12-24 lens.

No HDR.

[spystyle]

If you really want to analyze an image, check the EXIF. But this one has no EXIF intact so you'd have to ask the shooter.

[interested_observer]

Thanks for the information. Now the only things that I'm lacking is skill, knowledge and opportunity....

Nikkor AF-S 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED DX - Review / Test Report - Sample Shots & Verdict

The Nikkor AF-S 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED DX proved to be a very good performer. Its center resolution figures are exceptionally high and apart from 12mm @ f/4 the border quality is also impressive though a little less field curvature may be desirable at 12mm. CAs as well as the distortion characteristic are very good for an ultra-wide zoom lens whereas vignetting is about average due to the reduced APS-C image circle. The build quality is, in principal, very fine but you would usually expect a little more from a lens in this price class. The primary competitor is probably the Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4 AT-X Pro - a lens which is just as sharp but with a higher degree of CAs and worse flare in contra light - all at less than half the costs and combined with a better build quality. Costs aside it's a close race between the two with a slight edge for the Nikkor regarding optical quality. When taking the very different price tags in account the decision may be a little more complicated.

The Pentax DA 12-24 and the Tokina AF 12-24 are essentially one in the same lens. I've done similar shots, without really any more flare. Living in Arizona, I am still waiting for beach front property. I need to get over to San Diego.....

I've been thinking about why he would use a ND-8 filter....

In conditions of extreme light intensity, such as sunshine on snowy mountains or on the beach, or when using a camcorder, ND (Neutral Density) filters are recommended as essential.
Neutral Density filters are often ignored by photographers, but they have several uses and offer the possibility to achieve otherwise unachievable results. ND filters appear grey and reduce the amount of light reaching the film, they have no affect on color balance. They have four main uses:

1. To enable slow shutter speeds to be used, especially with fast films, to record movement in subjects such as waterfalls, clouds, cars, seas etc.
2. To decrease depth of field by allowing wider apertures to be used, which helps separate subjects from their background.
3. To decrease the effective ISO of high speed film (ie: above ISO400) and allow it to be used outdoors in blight situations.
4. To allow cine and video cameras (which have fixed shutter speeds) to film subjects such as snow, sand or other bright scenes which would normally cause over-exposure.

I am thinking to advance the decrease in light, so as to darken the overall appearance, while preserving the sky, clouds and setting sun - with the interaction and colors. If he would have waited 20 minutes for the sun to set further, he would have lost the light for the foreground.