Nature Photographers Network
This is the preserved archive of the original Nature Photographers Network. The community continues at naturephotographers.network.
Rock Stars   (x2)
‹ PreviousLandscape GalleryNext ›

Rock Stars (x2)

by scott lanz

Gallery: LandscapePosted July 2, 20179,394 views16 comments
I shot these rock figures in Devil's Garden (Escantle National Monument) at 2:00 a.m. on a nearly moonless night during my trip to Utah in May. I have two versions. In this version, the figures are silhouettes. In the follow up, I applied some light painting. I personally prefer the silhouette version a bit better, but the light painted version may appeal to more people, and the "Rock Stars" title may fit the light painted version a bit better as the figures maybe look more like they are on a stage performing, which was my impression. Anyway, I'd appreciate your thoughts on the image, including which one you like better. Nikon D610, 14-24 @15, 25 sec., iso 2500. Suggestions, questions, and other comments welcome. crying

Comments

16 comments
Comment posted by scott lanz on July 2, 2017 at 10:27 PM
Here's the second. Please click on it for the larger version. 
Registered on November 14, 2003, 840 Posts, 12902 Comments
Comment posted by Brian Schrayer on July 2, 2017 at 10:54 PM
Oh, my, Scott!  This is awesome.  The clarity and detail in the stars is among the best I have seen in a night shot.  At least at this size there is very little visible noise as well.  My preferences is for the silhouetted rocks.  Because the rocks have interesting form I think they work perfectly as silhouettes.  My one nit would be that I wish that the rock formations were not covering up the brightest part of the Milky Way.  But I'm not sure what other options you had to reposition.  I noticed that in the light painted version there is a greenish tint to the lower part of the sky.  If you wanted to use the light painted version I would just blend in the rocks from the light painted version with the sky from the non light painted version.  It should be a fairly simple selection in PS or you could use luminosity masks for the blending. 

I love the title!  I'm the king of bad puns, but this is a great pun!
Registered on May 28, 2004, 114 Posts, 2890 Comments
Comment posted by Jake Alletson on July 2, 2017 at 11:50 PM
My vote is for the silhouetted version.  Definitely worth the effort of being out there at 2:00 am.
Registered on May 3, 2016, 12 Posts, 163 Comments
Comment posted by Alberto Patiño on July 3, 2017 at 2:24 AM
Definitely the silhouettes!! Noise is well handled, and that star trails, even if discernible if one is picky, are short enough not to be a problem, at least for me. So no nits. At first I thought "Easter Island", but I also see your rationale for the title. 
Registered on December 2, 2014, 278 Posts, 1736 Comments
Comment posted by Rick Turner on July 3, 2017 at 7:59 AM
I like the first and would like to see all of the Milky Way...
Registered on February 18, 2012, 534 Posts, 2755 Comments
Comment posted by Michael Lowe on July 3, 2017 at 11:51 AM
Like the original version better. In fact, I love it. My initial impression was also of the Rapa Nui sculptures.devil
Registered on February 11, 2004, 777 Posts, 5252 Comments
Comment posted by Don Young on July 3, 2017 at 12:05 PM
Very clever title!  I like the first better.  Nice job!
Registered on April 23, 2015, 56 Posts, 224 Comments
Comment posted by Bill Leggett on July 3, 2017 at 1:06 PM
Interesting title, Scott.  I've been there four times and posted these from different positions, but always in daylight.  While Metate Arch is well known there, these formations are much more interesting to me and manageable for different compositions.
Registered on July 21, 2004, 706 Posts, 3233 Comments
Comment posted by Kathy Barnhart on July 3, 2017 at 10:30 PM
Fabulous night shot, and I like the first one far better than the second. It looks so much more natural, and the second has a greenish cast to it. The silhouettes do look like some primitive Easter Island sculptures, making the whole impact very mysterious and primeval. The sharpness of the stars is amazing, as well as their density. Magnificent!
Registered on November 11, 2011, 404 Posts, 1639 Comments
Comment posted by gary phillips on July 4, 2017 at 2:23 AM
The silhouette version is the ticket for me, Scott.  Fantastic MW and night image.  Super job.
Registered on October 24, 2013, 185 Posts, 4136 Comments
Comment posted by Ed Lowe on July 4, 2017 at 8:19 PM
Hands down the silhouette version for me, Scott. I think the silhouettes just add to the mood and mystery of the Milky Way and the star laden night time sky. Great work on this.

Ed
Registered on February 7, 2004, 414 Posts, 7115 Comments
Comment posted by Tony Kuyper on July 5, 2017 at 9:36 AM
I like the silhouette version best too. 
Registered on November 1, 2003, 364 Posts, 22328 Comments
Comment posted by Bo Chen on July 6, 2017 at 10:55 AM
It looks a bit yellowish to me. Not sure if it is the natural color but dark blue sky is my preference, maybe it's just personal taste.

The galaxy center is behind the rocks. I wonder if moving to the left or backward would be better.
Registered on February 14, 2017, 42 Posts, 74 Comments
Comment posted by Shirley Freeman on July 6, 2017 at 11:23 AM
This IS the best night shot I think I have seen, Scott, and yes, my vote is on the silhouette shot.  The light painted shot the rocks kind of get mixed with the stars and don't stand out as much to me.  Excellent photograph, that belongs on a calendar, or something where it can be displayed!  Well done!
Registered on May 27, 2017, 77 Posts, 844 Comments
Comment posted by scott lanz on July 6, 2017 at 12:00 PM
Thank you for your comments and suggestions. A couple people noted that the stone figures block part of the MW, which is true but unavoidable, at least when I was there. If I moved right or left even slightly, tall trees block the figures and night sky. This is really the only unobstructed vantage point. I could have waited and shot this later in the evening, but then the MW would be moving out of the frame to the left, would still have been partially blocked, and I would have lost even more sleep. I also think the MW behind the figures helps the silhouette.     
Registered on November 14, 2003, 840 Posts, 12902 Comments
Comment posted by Igor Doncov on July 6, 2017 at 7:08 PM
This image gives me an appreciation and understanding of how the ancient Easter Islanders must have felt in the presence of their statues. It may also help understand why they built them because in daylight they're less impressive. But in the open Pacific sky this must have been quite spectacular and having these behemoths superimposed in front gives a sense of security, awe, and mystery to the nightly event. Perhaps I'm seeing more into this than there is but that's part of the fun of looking at images: personal interpretation. 

The detail in that sky is remarkable given that this was shot at 25secs, which causes dots to look like commas. But even the large version doesn't reveal dashes. I prefer the original version as I'm not to fond of light painting. The second version shows details about the rocks which doesn't give you the chance to interpret as freely. Nice job.
Registered on November 22, 2014, 189 Posts, 2733 Comments