*Help* How to shoot this kind of landscape photo??

[Photologyst]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

But that's not photography: that's photoshopping.

PS processing has always been and will always be part of photography, except of course for those who don’t know how to do it.

The blur is controllable with software. As has already been mentioned by other photographers on this site, one cannot control Mother Nature.

[EOBeav]

You can also get a long exposure shot by using a strong enough ND-filter. I just picked up a 10-stop and have been amazed at the cloud movement I get, even at times when they don't appear to be moving quickly.

[quekbc]

Not sure about you guys, but i noticed the stars, or star, since i can only spot one, has moved?

If so, that would indicate a very long exposure, would it not?

[oldwolf]

Originally Posted by quekbc

Not sure about you guys, but i noticed the stars, or star, since i can only spot one, has moved?

If so, that would indicate a very long exposure, would it not?

Yes but it can be achieved in post as well. It's just easier to do it SOOC instead of in post.

[JStockhaus]

This effect can also be produced using a very wide angle lens.
Here is an example of one I did in Utah.
"On the Road to Canyonlands" Fine Art Print by Jay Stockhaus [2102832-4] - RedBubble.com

[edbayani]

i'm inclined to believe that this is a long exposure as the others have said and if you zoom in on the two stars faintly visible, you can see the streak in the stars, unless, this too, was done by the very meticulous for detail photographer, in editing.

[kmtheman]

I think that pick was taken at midnight or so, and the moon is behind the camera (full moon preferably) about 5min exposure, im guessing by the star movement

[sk66]

Originally Posted by Photologyst

PS processing has always been and will always be part of photography, except of course for those who don’t know how to do it.

The blur is controllable with software. As has already been mentioned by other photographers on this site, one cannot control Mother Nature.

While I agree it can be done in post and you'll have more control over direction/amount, I don't think it will look quite as natural/real. For this type of shot that is quite important as it's a main element and conveys much of the "feeling".

As always, it's better (and often easier) to get it right in-camera and minimize post.

[Usuqa]

'It looks like a long exposure shot to me, this is one i took.

Mugdock Country Park. by usuqa, on Flickr

There's no water.. and only a little sky but there is even some star movement in there (the building/trees and ground was Light by me and my wife running about with flashguns .) The Camera was left open for 296 seconds in builb mode with a remote. (There was hardly even any light to see..)

As for editing photo with what ever software.... If you don;t your not really geting the most from any camera. My k5 holds so much details in the highlights and shadows that you wont see from a Sooc jpg or defalt raw settings. Its only by editing the files that you can see truly what your camera can do. Even film was developed.. dodged/burned.. textured colored.. mixed with different chemicals for different effects. Most people never knew that and just payed someone to "develop" the film for them.