# Night at Delicate Arch



## Aloicious (Aug 12, 2013)

So we hiked up to delicate arch in Arches National Park the other night. I know, as far as landscapes are concerned, this is a fairly common shooting locale, but its common for a reason. I've been up there before, but never in the middle of the night, it was beautiful and just got better as the clouds dispersed some.

1 -the typical angle shot as you first approach the arch @50mm, it was still really cloudy behind it in this direction and stayed that way most of the time we were up there:






2 - angled shot from the side @ 16mm, this is when the clouds started to part a bit for us to see the Milky Way. I think I need to fix the light coloring on the bottom of the arch, I wasn't expecting this one to turn out like it did, the light is from someone down below it with one of those forehead flashlights looking up at the arch, the mix of flashlight (LED maybe?) and starlight, and ambient light on the horizon from the town make it tricky.


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 13, 2013)

here's a different version of #2 with a couple small changes:


----------



## weepete (Aug 13, 2013)

Great shots, fantastic locations


----------



## Woodsman (Aug 13, 2013)

Lovely, the second one really stands out.


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 13, 2013)

weepete said:


> Great shots, fantastic locations





Woodsman said:


> Lovely, the second one really stands out.



Thanks! it was a fun night. I want to go back and visit some of the other areas in the park during the night again. its ~4 hours from where I live.


----------



## NancyMoranG (Aug 13, 2013)

Wow! You make me want to pack my bags and go. I love Arches, and these are great.
Nancy


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 13, 2013)

NancyMoranG said:


> Wow! You make me want to pack my bags and go. I love Arches, and these are great.
> Nancy



Thanks! its a beautiful area, I'd highly recommend it. there are typically lots of other people around during the day from the other times I've been there, but the night was incredible, if you go on a clear new-moon night you can get some exceptional views.


----------



## SCraig (Aug 13, 2013)

Very nice shots.  Especially #2 with the Milky Way in the background.  It looks like the arch is right at the beginning of infinity.

Arches is certainly a fantastic place, and one I'd love to see at night.  I rode through there on a motorcycle trip with a friend, and we stopped so many times that we ran the battery down in one of the bikes.  Too many stops, not enough run time in between   The place just begs one to stop though.  Around every curve in the road is a scene that is better than the previous one.  It just never stops.


----------



## GaryT (Aug 13, 2013)

Beautiful shots, such an amazing place.


----------



## aguerra.1993 (Aug 14, 2013)

Great pictures! For the second one, did you take a picture exposed for the stars and then one exposed for the lit up arch and stack them or is it just one exposure?


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 14, 2013)

Thanks guys!

Aguerra, nope its just one single exposure...here's the image info: D800E, 16mm, f3.2, ISO3200, 65s exposure...I was actually exposing for the stars and expecting to get a silhouette of the arch, but the light painting on the arch was accidental by another person who happened to shine a flashlight up on the arch while my shutter was open. I got another shot with the silhouette/stars, but this one with the arch lit up turned out far better....the first shot the arch is lit by a flash probably 20 yards to camera left.


----------



## aguerra.1993 (Aug 20, 2013)

That's awesome. I wish there were places that dark here in Puerto Rico. Since it's such a small island, it's very hard to find a place that doesn't have light pollution, I am still searching though, and I was able to get some pictures with stars on my recent trip to Florida.


----------



## msgbmd2001 (Aug 20, 2013)

Awesome photos! I really liked the changes you made to #2.


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 20, 2013)

Thanks! 

aguerra1993 - yeah I bet being on the island is very restricting in that sense. I'm kindof lucky that I like within a few hours drive of some of the darkest areas in the country. Arches actually isn't even one of the darkest areas, you can still see the lights on the horizon from the nearby towns. but luckily the nearby towns are pretty small, there aren't any real 'cities' anywhere near it. Moab is pretty small, and Grand Junction, CO is probably the closest place that could be really called a 'city', but its over 100 miles away.


----------



## aguerra.1993 (Aug 21, 2013)

Don't know if this question qualifies as noob-ish, but how did you not get star trails with such a long exposure, and why doesn't the light shining up the arch kind of overexpose some of the picture?


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 21, 2013)

aguerra.1993 said:


> Don't know if this question qualifies as noob-ish, but how did you not get star trails with such a long exposure, and why doesn't the light shining up the arch kind of overexpose some of the picture?



if you look at it at 100% there actually is a small amount of star trailing, I probably should have done a slightly shorter exposure on it, but part of the reason the trailing isn't as noticeable is because the shutter speed vs star trailing is directly related to the focal length that is used, as well as what part of the sky is being photographed. the longer the focal length, the less time you can leave the shutter open before trailing becomes apparent. since that shot was at ultra wide 16mm, I was able to keep the shutter open longer without having as much trailing issues.

as far as the light on the arch, part of it was sheer luck, since I had no control over the accidental light spill of the other guy's flashlight on the arch, it very well could have over exposed it, however he just had it up there for a short time (maybe 1s or less), it wasn't actually shining on the arch for the entire ~60s exposure, combined with the fact that the actual light output of small flashlights isn't very much in comparison to most other light sources, I kindof just got lucky. however I did have to separate the arch from the sky and process them separately in post due to the differences in light temperature from the flashlight vs starlight vs city lights on the horizon, so it also made PP a bit more intensive than normal, especially vs shot #1 which is lit with a speedlight, so color temp was much less of an issue.


----------



## aguerra.1993 (Aug 21, 2013)

Alright, thank you so much for the explanation, I can't wait to find a dark enough place for cool pictures like these.


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 21, 2013)

here's a nice google map-like site that shows areas of light pollution/dark skies that might help:

Dark Sky Finder


----------



## fotofinish (Aug 25, 2013)

Your alternative #2 is just great and #1 has a great eerie feeling about it.


----------



## phogan2292 (Aug 25, 2013)

I'm a huge fan of #2, I think the accidental flashlight worked really well! Did you focus for the arch or for the sky? I would've thought f/3.2 was a bit fast but your images came out quite sharp.


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 26, 2013)

fotofinish said:


> Your alternative #2 is just great and #1 has a great eerie feeling about it.



Thanks, the somewhat harsh side lighting can give an eerie feeling, that's for sure. 



phogan2292 said:


> I'm a huge fan of #2, I think the accidental flashlight worked really well! Did you focus for the arch or for the sky? I would've thought f/3.2 was a bit fast but your images came out quite sharp.



Thanks, I was focused at infinity, I'm not usually too worried about shooting wide open, especially on the 14-24, it does pretty well all the way down to 2.8 in terms of sharpness, but I do usually step down just a hair for long exposure stuff like this.


----------



## BlueCobalt (Aug 26, 2013)

great shot and thanks for the explanations, was always curious about shots like these and not getting the star trails


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 28, 2013)

BlueCobalt said:


> great shot and thanks for the explanations, was always curious about shots like these and not getting the star trails



thanks! yup, not too hard but takes some practice and understanding of the physics behind it all...


----------



## molested_cow (Aug 28, 2013)

To me the stars look like it can do with less exposure. 65s is a bit too long. I use a 20mm lens on FX and 30s is the max I will go.

I never got to take night shots at the Delicate Arch. I was there at sunset but had to rush to Salt Lake City, so we had to leave. There were tons of people waiting for the night fall so I can imagine the distraction and possible frustration trying to get a long exposure shot there.


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 28, 2013)

yeah, I mentioned I should have done it as a shorter exposure in post #16, I can get around 40-45s at 16mm, but that's even pushing it a little, I actually wasn't expecting this shot (#2) specifically to turn out, I was just getting things setup and tested on this shot, it just happened to be one that turned out decent, it was at like 2 or 3am, so by that time most of the other people had left except for one other photographer that was up there.

I really really want to rent or get a 24 1.4 and go do some star shooting with that, the 2 full stops over the 2.8 I have would be exceptional.


----------

