Light chasing

[zetson]

My wife and son are away this summer and suddenly I had too much spare time. So I thought: "Hey, why not drive six hours to get a midnight sun shot?" I decided to go to Hamningberg in Norway, (map) a small abandoned fishing village where no houses were burned down during scorched earth in 1945. These houses are left as they were, so they have clear marks of detoriation.

I checked the weather forecast, and it seemed fine. Yes, excellent timing. Sky clear! I started driving from my home about 4 PM so that I would reach Hamningberg before midnight, so that I could expose the midnight sun in all it's glory, rolling on the horizon. During the drive I paid close attention to the sun and the sky to make sure that forecast was correct.

At 10 PM I reached my destination. I was clearly disappointed. First, I hadn't checked the topography of Hamningberg. I learned that this place was situated in a bay pointing to the south west. And north of it, a large hill blocked the view, so I couldn't see the sun... And to top it all, the forecast didn't tell the whole truth. Well, the weather in Hamningberg was OK, but the weather way up north, in the horizon, was completely covered in clouds.

So here I was, in the middle of nothing, in the dark, six hours from home, with no midnight sun to shoot. Instead I drove to the village to get some good captures of detoriation, but to my surprise I found that all the houses had recieved extreme make-overs. Each and every one. No photo opportunites there. At least not the way I like it.

My plan was to sleep in my car at Hamningberg before heading home the next day. I parked my car on the top of a small hill and wrapped the sleeping bag around me.

Accidentaly, I saw a bright spot on the mountains in the west. Alpenglow! The sun had breaked through some clouds, and lightened up the landscape. I jumped out of the sleeping bag, put on some clothes and drove quickly down to the shore on the westside of the peninsula (map). Yes, the sun was partly uncovered now and the sun beams hit a small part of the mountain walls. But it didn't seem to last very long. It was about 50 meters down to the water. And I needed to shoot it with the water in the foreground. Between me and the water was stones. Many stones. Wet, pumpkin-sized stones covered in slippery seaweed. Normaly I wouldn't dare to go there with a tripod and $2k worth of camera equipment. But that was probably the only chance I would get during this trip to get a decent shot. So I started walking quickly. It was OK in the beginning, but when I got to the wet stones, it got much, much worse. I had only one hand free (the other was holding the tripod) and if I slipped, I had to decide if I would protect me or the camera with it... It seemed to become darker, and yet I hadn't reached the shore. My heart was pounding and started to sweat. For every step I made I had to make sure I had a good grip. I heard the ugly breaking sound of small sea shells shattering to small pieces every time I stepped on a new stone. Finally, I got to the water, with only to close-calls. I unfolded the tripod and threw it down in the water and mounted the camera. It was definitly darker now; the alpenglow had decreased in size. I'm glad I had done similar "slow shutter"-speed shots before, because I had no time to think about the in-camera settings. I mounted the remote trigger cable, and turned the polarizer. OK, time to shoot!

But, no wait, the tripod wasn't stable. I tried to change the lenght on one of the legs, but the sea floor was too uneven. With a one second exposure I couldn't count on a shaky tripod. So I put my foot down, right in the salty and icy cold water. I put it under one of the tripod leg's. It was stable enough. I clicked the shutter button.

This is the first picture I got. I shot a couple afterwards with different exposure settings, but the water looked pretty boring on these.



(I used f/22 (didn't care about diffraction at that point) and 1 sec exposure. I pointed the camera at a right angle from the sun so that the polarizer would have best effect. I used a Sigma 10-20mm lens@20mm. Any focal length below would be too wide since the polarizer won't have any effect on the edges below 20mm. In lightroom I tinted the photo with a little red and made it colder by decreasing the temperature (what else?) to achive the purple look. Finished it by increasing the contrast.)

This was my experience in light chasing. But while driving back home the day after I started thinking. Sometimes you're lucky, sometimes you're not. If the situation isn't like hoped for, deal with it. While jaywalking over those slippery rocks, I could have seriously hurt myself. And my cell phone was left in the car. Does getting a good shot justify sacrificing your equipment and health?

[clayhilda55]

Beautiful shot! It seems you are at the top of a mountain. I love the serenity of the photo and nice colors too!

[Hayward Taylor]

Hello there ---- what a story ... I think the end result makes it all worthwhile ... and the experience if you have to do it again ... I still say it's a classic image

[zetson]

Thank you, calyhilda and Hayward! Glad it paid off.

Hey, Hayward, I like your collection of DSLRs. Which one do you use the most?

[sk66]

Originally Posted by zetson

While jaywalking over those slippery rocks, I could have seriously hurt myself. And my cell phone was left in the car. Does getting a good shot justify sacrificing your equipment and health?

Nice write-up, nice shot, and you've got more drie than I usually do (sleeping in the car to get a pic?!!)

But to answer the question ...yes, it does. If not, why spend thousands on pro quality gear? I take my stuff kayaking, rock climbing, etc etc...and I have it insured. I'm insured as well, but I care less about that

[zetson]

Originally Posted by sk66

Nice write-up, nice shot, and you've got more drie than I usually do (sleeping in the car to get a pic?!!)

But to answer the question ...yes, it does. If not, why spend thousands on pro quality gear? I take my stuff kayaking, rock climbing, etc etc...and I have it insured. I'm insured as well, but I care less about that

Haha, yes, I probably wouldn't do all this if I knew it would only pay me with one photo.

I agree, the camera gear was my smallest concern. It was quite windy, and I could see in the sun rays that salty water drops was blowing right at me and the gear. But I cared as much of salt getting into the camera and lens as I cared about diffraction But I was a bit worried of laying lifeless on the shore in this desolate place...

[beetwo77]

I think that is a great photo made even better by the story

I had a similar experience on Friday evening. I was taking a long exposure using a torch to illuminate the cliff when I noticed I was getting wet. About a minute later I realised my camera gear was sitting behind a nearby rock and went and looked and realised there were waves washing over my bag containing every lense I own save for the one on the camera. Fortunately it all ended well and the only thing that got wet was the bag (and my boots and jeans).

Pity the photo didn't come out how I hoped as I didn't get the time to finish the photo. Thanks again for the great photo and story.

From Terrigal

The light painting technique did work for some of the others though

From Terrigal

[zetson]

*shivers*

What an awful sight, seeing all your investments being drowned. I'm glad it all went well! Another reason for getting a waterproof camera bag.

The light painting was a good idea. The second photo looks beautiful. What shutter speed did you use?

[ill_noize]

Great story and better shot!

[beetwo77]

Hi Zetson,

the second photo was taken on a tripod with a 120 second exposure. I used a remote to avoid bumping the camera. The photo is basically in complete darkness with ISO of 100 but with the length of exposure, you still get reasonable detail in the sky.

I used a bicycle headlight shining on the two rocks. I basically held the torch on one rock for 10 seconds, then on the other for 10 seconds alternating for the 2 minute duration of the exposure.

The first shot I was hoping for around a 10 minute exposure but got cut short at about 5 minutes when I realised my gear was about to be lost to the deep!

Its hard to tell but that is about a 30 m (100 ft) high cliff. Its a little difficult to illuminate a cliff so large with a bicycle light but as you can see it was on the way to working...Again considering the scene was in complete darkness except for the light from my torch I'm suprised you can see any detail at all. With the cliff face, I moved the torch around the cliff face in a slow circle motion lighting up areas of the cliff and walking around shining it on the cliff from different angles. I read about doing this in a magazine somewhere. It seems to work suprisingly well.

I can see it would be even better for a sunset / sunrise scene where to correctly expose the sky, you lose detail in the foreground. You could instead use a bright light source (like a fill flash I suppose, just a less bright one that covers more of the scene).

Will be looking forward to checking out some more of your light chasing work

Regards Ian