Latest Posts by wayne-pinkston - Page 8

Lost in Their Own World by Wayne Pinkston Via Flickr: Remember those days when you could walk along holding hands and the rest of the world was as remote as another universe? Oh, those days... This was taken on a beach in Darwin, Australia. We were at an outdoor craft and food market near the beach, and I was lingering in the food section when my wife rushed up and said, "You've got to see this sunset"! I dragged myself away from the food and saw one of the most beautiful and colorful sunsets I have seen. We just clicked away until the light was gone. Thanks for looking. All comments are appreciated. Hope you enjoy!

Thoughts about Contrast

My background is the profession of Radiology. The making of radiographs, Magnetic Resonance scans (MRI), CAT scans, Ultrasounds, etc. share a great deal with the technology of digital photographs. All are digital images, and the issues of getting quality images and good signal to noise is very similar. More signal is good, more noise is bad. More sharpness is good. Sharpness is primarily due to spacial resolution and contrast resolution.  There is one area where the emphasis is different. In MRI scanning and CT scanning we emphasize two things to make good images, spacial resolution and contrast resolution (in radiology we commonly say soft tissue resolution). Both combine to create the perception of sharpness. The spacial resolution is important in Radiology, as long as you have enough, but the size of the pixels is vastly different. For years in CT scanning and MRI scanning we used a matrix of 512 X 512 pixels, as that was all the machine were capable of. It finally advanced to 1024 X 1024 pixels and is slowly moving upwards. This gives a ONE Megapixel image!!! It is less spacial resolution than the earliest Digital Cameras!  

So how could you see or diagnose anything at such low resolutions? Well, it turns out that contrast resolution, or the ability to get contrast differences between normal and abnormal tissues was at least as important, if not more important than spacial resolution. For years most of the research went into getting better soft tissue differentation (contrast resolution) rather than spacial resolution. It was more important. 

In photography we talk a lot more about sharpness, and we usually mean spacial resolution. There is little talk about contrast resolution. Well, contrast resolution does matter. Some lens have significantly more contrast than others, but it is sometimes hard to even find this data. The perception is that they are sharper lens.

How does contrast matter in Nightscapes? Well, the sky at night has tremendous contrast between the dark sky and bright stars. Also, the contrast in the sky is typically increased even further in processing. This creates the Perception of great sharpness. So does the sky need sharpening in post processing? I would argue that the answer is no. Sharpening often makes the stars look “crispy” and harsh. In addition increasing the sharpness in Photoshop or other programs increases the noise in the image. This degrades the image. If anything, it is better to do some noise reduction and decrease the noise and perhaps soften the sky. 

The darker foregrounds are completely different.They usually have more noise and very low contrast (except for the illuminated areas). I typically select the foreground and do generous noise reduction here, and then use the Unsharp Mask in Photoshop to Increase Local Contrast. This is a bit different than regular sharpening. If you use a very high radius of 50-60, and a low amount of 10-20 (threshold of 0), you will increase local contrast and increase the Perception of sharpness, without increasing the perception of noise.

Cheers, Wayne

2015

Recommended eBooks for Nightscape Photography

1) Milky Way Nightscapes by Royce Bair

2) Nightscape by David Kingham

Both are excellent books and I have read both more than once. The information in the books is complementary. 

Questions and Answers

Airglow

 People have asked me a number of questions about equipment, issues, and technique in Nightscape or Landscape Astrophotography. Since many of these questions are recurring, I am going to post the questions and answers here. I’ll answer your questions to the best of my ability!

Q: Why is the sky green?

A: You asked where the green was coming from in the Milky Way photo. The green color is from "airglow" that the camera can image, but you cannot see with the naked eye. In photographs it looks very much like very faint Northern Lights or Aurora Borealis, but occurs anywhere on earth, is best seen when it is very dark, and best seen toward the horizon. It looks odd and so a lot of photographers just try to get rid of it. I like the "otherworldly" look so I enhance it instead. Here is what Wikipedia says: Airglow is caused by various processes in the upper atmosphere, such as the recombination of atoms, which were photo ionized by the sun during the day, luminescence caused by cosmic rays striking the upper atmosphere and chemiluminescence caused mainly by oxygen and nitrogen reacting with hydroxyl ions at heights of a few hundred kilometers. It is not noticeable during the daytime because of the scattered light from the sun.

Questions and Answers

Star Trails

People have asked me a number of questions about equipment, issues, and technique in Nightscape or Landscape Astrophotography. Since many of these questions are recurring, I am going to post the questions and answers here. I’ll answer your questions to the best of my ability!

Q: Why don’t I see star trails in your 30 second exposure? Did you use a tracking device? I get star trails with my 24 mm lens at 30 seconds. 

A: There is no tracking device. If I was using a 24 mm lens or so, I would get star trails at 30 sec., but this was done with a 15 mm fisheye lens (I have corrected for distortion), and the wide Field of View makes the star trails so small that they are not visible unless you mag it up a lot. There is a simple guideline to avoid overly large star trails. Divide 500 by the focal length of the lens. So a 24 mm lens would be 500/24 = 20.8 seconds. You want to keep your exposures for a 24 mm lens under 20 sec, and for a 15 mm lens under 33 seconds. Most people call this the “Rule of 500″. If you are going to blow up the photo really large, then you could use 400 instead of 500.

Questions and Answers

Reducing noise in the high ISO images

People have asked me a number of questions about equipment, issues, and technique in Nightscape or Landscape Astrophotography. Since many of these questions are recurring, I am going to post the questions and answers here. I’ll answer your questions to the best of my ability!

Q: How do you get the noise to be so low at ISO 6400?

A: The Canon 6D does very well with noise to start with at ISO 6400, and is very manageable up to 12,800. . I open the image in Lightroom, and in the Detail panel I use the following for ISO 6400: Sharpening 40, radius 0.7, Detail 50, Masking 50, Luminance Noise Reduction 40, Detail 50, Contrast 0, Color Noise Reduction 20, Detail 50, Smoothness 100. This does remarkably well for ISO 6400. I then export the image to Photoshop. Sometimes I use Topaz noise reduction in Photoshop after I have finished processing the image, but not always.  I do this more to soften the sky than to reduce noise. In the processing of the image I increase the contrast of the sky in "Curves", and this can make the sky look overly sharp and harsh in my opinion, so I try to soften the sky with some moderate noise reduction.

In my opinion it is bad to overly sharpen the sky. The sky has a great deal of contrast to begin with, white stars and dark background. The contrast is so great that it increases perceived contrast, and you don’y need to increase sharpness any greater. It makes the stars look “crispy” and harsh. Also extra sharpening will dramatically increase the perception of noise. 

I also use Topaz Noise reduction on dark foregrounds as the noise there is much greater.

Questions and Answers

The very basics of getting started in nightscapes

People have asked me a number of questions about equipment, issues, and technique in Nightscape or Landscape Astrophotography. Since many of these questions are recurring, I am going to post the questions and answers here. I’ll answer your questions to the best of my ability!

Q: What do I need to do to get a night sky photo with my Canon 20D?

A: Here's a start to night sky photos with your 20D.

1)  Put the ISO on "H" which is 3200. The image will have noise but you need the high ISO.. That is the highest ISO for your camera.

2)  Use the fastest wide angle lens you have. F2.8 is good but if the fastest wide angle lens you have is f3.5 or f4.0 then use that. Open the aperture as wide as you can. You want a lens that is 24 mm or wider optimally. A 20 mm lens or wider is even better.

3)  Put your camera on manual or "M" mode.

4)  Focus on infinity

5)  Use an exposure time of 15-30 sec. 

6)  Use a tripod

7)  Use RAW files, and not jpegs (or save both). RAW files are better for processing later.

8)  Here is a starting guide to processing the images:

lightcrafter.smugmug.com/About-Nightscapes

Scroll down until you see "Workflow" and follow that lead.

Questions and Answers

Rattlesnakes!

Q: Do you worry about rattlesnakes in the desert at night?

A: You can bet I do keep a lookout for rattlesnakes at night! I am very conscious of where I step, and wear really high boots. It's not what most people think of with night photography, but I try to make sure I come back alive! It's a different world out there with limited vision (darkness), but a really beautiful world. I love it! In a more general sense you have to pay attention to where you and walking and what you are doing, and generally move slowly and carefully. A bigger danger is climbing on large rocks and boulders at night. When you turn the lights off you really need to know where you can move your feet.

Questions and Answers:

 Handheld Torch/Flashlight for Persons within the night photos

People have asked me a number of questions about equipment, issues, and technique in Nightscape or Landscape Astrophotography. Since many of these questions are recurring, I am going to post the questions and answers here. I’ll answer your questions to the best of my ability!

Q:   I had a question that you lightly pinged off of in one of your descriptions. A couple of your pics have a humanoid subject holding a torch aimed at the sky. You mention in one description how you had wished you had focused the light a little better. I tried using a headlamp one morning and could not see the beam at all in the sky. All you could see was an overblown white patch on the humanoid's face. How exactly do you get the beam of the torch shining at the sky to show up in the image? I was figuring we could exaggerate it with some powder in the sky, but that seemed a little silly? Or is it just a higher power torch than what my headlamp is capable of? Thanks for your time, and again, great captures.

A: Thanks for looking and writing. You have to use the right kind of light to make it work at night. To see a person holding a light or torch, it works best if you have a LED flashlight/torch, and if it is a focusing light. The last part is important. You need to get a focusing flashlight/torch. The one I used in the photo you mentioned was a focusing COAST brand light. To made it even more focused you can make a "snoot" or a black tube or cylinder to go around the end of the light. This prevents or minimizes side scatter. You can make it out of black rubbery material, black construction paper, etc. But since them I have learned of an even better focusing light, the Duracell Durabeam 1000 Ultra High Beam light. It focuses to an amazingly tight beam and really shows up well in photos. There is also a "500" lumen version. You can get it at Amazon for around $35 USD, and I have been told it is available at Costco for around $22 or so. 

I bought a focusing Coast Brand headlamp, but I would like to get one more powerful, so I do not have a really good recommendation for a headlamp to be in the photos.

Questions and Answers

Processing Airglow

People have asked me a number of questions about equipment, issues, and technique in Nightscape or Landscape Astrophotography. Since many of these questions are recurring, I am going to post the questions and answers here. I’ll answer your questions to the best of my ability!

Q: Very nice panoramic in a wonderful place. One question Wayne, always in your picture I'm looking the airglow, Are you lucking or a special technique? ;-), thanks, Regards.

A: Thanks for looking Gabriel. The answer is both, sometimes lucky, and sometimes processing technique. There is frequently some degree of airglow present, but not always. If the airglow is present then the processing workflow I use does enhance it along with the light pollution. Lots of people try to get rid of the airglow and make the skies more uniform in color to meet their own and others expectations about the night sky. There are actions and workflows to get rid of these colors. Instead I go the opposite direction and enhance them to some degree if they are present. I start in Lightroom and then export to Photoshop. If you make the sky blue from the outset in Lightroom, it covers up most of the airglow and decreases light pollution to some degree. It can also make the airglow and light pollution a less pleasing color. If you initially make the darkest part of the sky a neutral "greyish" in Lightroom it will bring out more colors in the sky near the horizon later in processing. The subtle colors are less suppressed, and when you make the darkest sky more neutral it actually makes the colors of light pollution and airglow a more pleasing color and less of a "ugly" color. I export to photoshop and increase contrast in the sky in curves, and later make the sky bluer at the end. I describe the process here: 

http://lightcrafter.smugmug.com/About-Nightscapes

Questions and Answers

Lights for illuminating Nightscapes

People have asked me a number of questions about equipment, issues, and technique in Nightscape or Landscape Astrophotography. Since many of these questions are recurring, I am going to post the questions and answers here. I’ll answer your questions to the best of my ability!

Q:   I noticed that in many of your Milky Way shots you include a nicely lit, probably light-painted (in a subtle way) foreground. What flashlight(s) or illumination do you use for your light painting? The way a lot of your scenes look is completely natural so either you're using moonlight (doubtful), composites (maybe) or light painting using a really good technique. So I would love to know how you achieve those great foregrounds.

A: Yes, I use a form of static light painting for most of my photos. I use dimmable LED video lights with warming filters and diffusion filters. The lights are too blue without the filters, but the ones I use all came with warming filters. The ones I use most are F&V Z96 (96 LEDs) dimmable Video LEDs that I purchased on Amazon for around $80 USD. There Is also A Neewer 160 that is even brighter for about $30, but sometimes too bright. I just discovered the Newer 60 LED, and the Neewer 32 LED lights for around $20, and I am hoping these will be good for small spaces like inside arches. I just bought them. I usually place a F&V Z 96 on a miniature tripod about 40-50 meters away if possible, to the side, and at around 45 degrees to the object of interest. This helps to create shadows and depth. If you have the light too near you then the photo looks flat. It needs to be at an angle to the scene. I place the same LED lights in arches or behind rocks, etc., and if they are too bright, then I place a lens cloth (black or white), or napkin, or handkerchief over the front to damp the light. In tight spaces I will sometimes use a hand held light or torch. The hand held halogen lights, lithium or xenon have the right color of light. Black and Decker and Stanley make rechargeable versions and are available at Home Depot, etc, for $20-30. I never shine them directly on the object of interest. I find a rock or even the ground and shine the light on something off to the side at around 45 degrees, and the reflected light will look more natural and even. 

Coral Sea Milky Way by Wayne Pinkston Via Flickr: This is a vertical panorama taken on the NE coast of Australia between the towns of Cairns and Port Douglas, in the region of the Great Barrier Reef. This part of the Pacific is called the Coral Sea. This is a stack of 8 horizontal image stacked vertically, each horizontal image taken with a Canon 16-35 mm lens at 16 mm, f 2.8, 30 sec, ISO 8000. So this image is pretty wide as well as "tall". From the perspective of an observer from the Northern Hemisphere, the Milky Way is fascinating in the Southern Hemisphere, and presents its own unique challenges. Here I am talking about the arch MW as a whole, and not just the core. First, the Milky Way arches high overhead at this time of year (April). The arch starts out lower on the horizon, but as the night progress it rapidly assumes a position high overhead. As a result the MW in the early night is a lot like the MW arch in the NH (Northern Hemisphere) in early spring, and then later in the night it is a lot like the NH MW in late summer and fall (more vertical) where it meets the horizon. Another difference is that the core of the MW is in the middle of the MW arch, and not near the horizon as we commonly see in the NH. As a result you need a really wide field of view or stacked panorama images to get good photos of the core and landscape at the same time. As a result you see a lot of panoramas of the MW taken from the SH (Southern Hemisphere). As for this image, it was taken after Moonset at around 2:30 pm. By this time the MW core was high in the sky, and I used a vertical stack to include the core. Since we did not plan the trip around night photography, I had to take the chances available, and this night I had a couple of good hours of shooting, after Moonset, but before the MW core got to high. A couple of nights later the MW was just about directly overhead before the Moon set, high enough to cause problems. When it is that high it is hard to include much landscape. This was probably as clear as mud. Hope you enjoy! Thanks in advance for taking the time to look and comment. 

Trona Pinnacles by Wayne Pinkston Via Flickr: This is a panorama of the Trona Pinnacles in California, USA, another small step in my efforts to photograph landscapes at night (this time a larger area). For orientation the parking lot is on the left and the dirt road in the foreground goes around the right side of the formation and carries you deeper into the park. There is "static" light painting. There is a light far to the right, and several small lights among the pinnacles. There was a lot of light pollution aiding in the lighting. The bright area along the horizon to the left is Ridgecrest, Ca., and I believe the light pollution on the bottom right is Barstow, Ca. The image wraps around more than 180 degrees, approx. 210 degrees. There is some airglow near the horizon creating the greenish effect in the sky. Many night photographers remove or diminish the light pollution and airglow to make the scene look more natural or to make the sky look more like people expect it to look. I have decided to go along with what the camera detects rather than what you expect to see. As a result this produces a somewhat surreal effect, which to me has a more exotic feel. The rock spires are called Tufa Spires, and are up to 140 feet (43 meters) high. Over 30 movies and TV shows have been shot in this alien landscape, including Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek V, and Planet of the Apes. This is a series of 15 vertical images combined in Lightroom (the new version has a panorama merge function). The images were taken with a Canon 1D X camera and Nikon 14-24 mm lens at f 2.8, 14 mm, 30 sec exposures, and ISO 6400. Hope you enjoy! Thanks in advance for taking the time to look and comment. 

A Quiet Night in Joshua Tree by Wayne Pinkston Via Flickr: Joshua Tree National Park in Southern California, USA, with the Milky Way above. This was taken in an attempt to capture the unique landscape and feel of Joshua Tree National Park at night. In some ways Joshua Tree reminds me of the Alabama Hills, but with lots of odd looking trees. :-) The park contains portions of the Mojave Desert and the Colorado Desert, and is slightly larger than the state of Rhode Island, approximately 100 X 50 Km. The Joshua Tree is the Yucca Brevifolia, and they are usually grow in a widely spaced and scattered pattern. Much of the park is considered "High Desert", ranging up to 5,500 feet (1850 Meters). There are 2 small static light lights among the rocks, and a brighter light 30-40 meters to my right at about 45 degrees. One problem in Joshua Tree is the shadows, as there are lots of boulders, shrubs, and trees scattered around. This is taken shortly after the Milky Way has risen above the horizon, and at that time has a more horizontal orientation, later to become more of an arch. Canon 1D x Camera, Nikon 14-24 mm lens at 14 mm, f 2.8, 20 sec, ISO 6400, 3700 K. Hope you enjoy! 

Milky Way over the Coral Sea by Wayne Pinkston Via Flickr: This is another night shot taken on a beach on the NE coast of Australia, between Cairns and Port Douglas. This is a panorama of 14 vertical images combined in Photoshop, taken with a Canon 6D camera, Canon 16-35 mm lens, at f 2.8, 30 sec, 16 mm, and ISO 6400. As compared to the Northern Hemisphere in April, the Milky Way arches high overhead, and continues to rise as the night progresses, Soon the MW is directly overhead, and it takes a really large field of view to capture . The challenge is fun in a different way. Also the core of the MW is more centered, and is very high in the sky, as opposed to the Northern Hemisphere where it is closer to the horizon. Frequently in the Northern Hemisphere the low positioned core competes with light pollution, or features on the horizon. In the Southern Hemisphere its high position places it in the darker portions of the sky, and detail and color in the core is better preserved. Alternatively, it is harder to get the core and interesting features in the same frame in the Southern Hemisphere. Disclaimer: Unfortunately several unruly pixels were harmed in the making of this image. Hope you enjoy!

Morning Twilight at the Trona Pinnacles by Wayne Pinkston Via Flickr: This one is a bit different. I overstayed my welcome, trying to get as many photos around the Pinnacles as possible before the sun rose, but despite my best efforts, the sun rose anyway. I was still shooting when the morning twilight started. As I took this photo the sun's glow was starting to be seen on the horizon, and with light pollution created a yellow glow. There were clouds near the horizon which were illuminated also. The sky was becoming noticeably lighter, but you could still see the Milky Way surprisingly well. There are 2 static lights helping to light the spires, one downhill to my right, and one downhill from my feet. There is also a fair amount of ambient light present from the twilight hour. It was a kind of "golden hour" before sunrise. Canon 1Dx Camera, Nikon 14-24 mm lens at 20 mm, f 2.8, 30 sec, and ISO 6400. Hope you enjoy!

Joshua Tree and Milky Way Panorama by Wayne Pinkston Via Flickr: This is a panorama of Joshua Tree National Park at Night, in an attempt to capture to feel of the park at night. This is a panorama of combined vertical images, taken with a Canon 1Dx camera, and a Nikon 14-24 mm lens at 14 mm, f 2.8, 20 sec. exposures and ISO 6400. there are 2 small lights hidden among the rocks and a larger light approx. 40 - 50 meters to my right. There a a considerable amount of light pollution around Joshua Tree. This creates aa background ambient light so the park does not seem "pitch black", and actually helps to light the foreground somewhat. This ambient light is a very "flat" light however, and does not create a very pleasing look. The added lights create shadows and create some depth to the photo. Thanks for looking. All comments are appreciated. Hope you enjoy! 

Sunset Arch Panorama, Escalante by Wayne Pinkston Via Flickr: This is a panorama of Sunset Arch in the Escalante National Monument, Utah. This was taken in a workshop with Royce Bair (his workshops and ebook are highly recommended). This is a combination of 12 vertical images, taken with a Canon 6D Camera, and a Nikon 14-24 mm lens at 14 mm, f 2.8, 20 sec., and ISO 8000. The arch is about a 20-30 minute hike from the parking lot, and is less visited than many of the well known arches in Utah. It's petty much in the middle of nowhere, off the beaten path. Our group settled in for the night and we were blessed with great weather. Escalante is one of the least light polluted areas I have seen in the USA. This makes for excellent detail in the sky. The faint light pollution on the horizon is from Paige, Arizona or Lake Powell, many miles distant. Doesn't the Arch look like a sleeping dragon? Thanks for looking. Hope you enjoy! 

Trona Pinnacles by Wayne Pinkston Via Flickr: This is a panorama of the Trona Pinnacles in California, USA, another small step in my efforts to photograph landscapes at night (this time a larger area). For orientation the parking lot is on the left and the dirt road in the foreground goes around the right side of the formation and carries you deeper into the park. There is "static" light painting. There is a light far to the right, and several small lights among the pinnacles. There was a lot of light pollution aiding in the lighting. The bright area along the horizon to the left is Ridgecrest, Ca., and I believe the light pollution on the bottom right is Barstow, Ca. The image wraps around more than 180 degrees, approx. 210 degrees. There is some airglow near the horizon creating the greenish effect in the sky. Many night photographers remove or diminish the light pollution and airglow to make the scene look more natural or to make the sky look more like people expect it to look. I have decided to go along with what the camera detects rather than what you expect to see. As a result this produces a somewhat surreal effect, which to me has a more exotic feel. This is a series of 15 vertical images combined in Lightroom (the new version has a panorama merge function). The images were taken with a Canon 1D X camera and Nikon 14-24 mm lens at f 2.8, 14 mm, 30 sec exposures, and ISO 6400. Hope you enjoy! Thanks in advance for taking the time to look and comment. 

The Milky Way over the Coral Sea by Wayne Pinkston Via Flickr: This image was taken along the NE coast of Australia, between Cairs and Port Douglas, along the area known as the Coral Sea. This is the area of the Great Barrier Reef. We had planned a vacation with some friends, and the conditions did not to look favorable for any night photography, so I almost did not take my tripod. I happened to notice that this area was remarkably dark on the Dark Sky Finder App, and there would be a few hours of darkness after Moonset in the early a.m. on 2 nights we were there, so I took the tripod along and I was glad I did. After the moon set the Milky Way and stars were as beautiful as I had ever seen them, with the structure of the Milky Way and gas clouds clearly visible to the naked eye. It was a great experience to be there just to see the sky. The light pollution in the distance is a resort and the town of Cairns. This is a panorama of approximately 210 degrees. This is a combination of 15 vertical images, taken with a Canon 6D camera, and a Canon 16-35 mm lens, at f 2.8, 16 mm, 20 sec exposures, and ISO 12,800. Combining images in a panorama remarkably decreases noise. The Milky Way arches high overhead in the Southern Hemisphere, so you need a lot of vertical coverage to include it all, especially later in the night. The moon had just set so the was a little ambient light still remaining when I took this series. Hope you enjoy! 

Landscape Arch on Flickr.

Landscape Arch Panorama in Arches National Park, Utah, USA. I have posted a similar panorama previously from the same spot that I was not satisfied with. I decided to give it another try. Hope Thanks for your patience if you have seen this before. This is a series of 9 vertical images combined in photoshop, taken with a Bower 24 mm f 1.4 lens, at f 2.0, 20 sec exposures, and ISO 6400. This arch is really large (290 feet, 88 meters wide) and a real challenge to light uniformly. There were lots of messed up shots on this one, and I never quite got the right side fully lit, but at least you can see the whole arch! Hope you enjoy!

Fairyland Canyon on Flickr.

Fairyland Canyon in Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah. Lighting set up by Royce Bair in one of his workshops.

Arch Rock on Flickr.

Arch Rock in Joshua Tree National Park, Ca., USA. This is facing NE, away from the core of the Milky Way and towards the northern arm. The Andromada Galaxy is seen in the center of the sky.

Balanced Rock Panorama on Flickr.

Balanced Rock Panorama, Arches National Park, Utah, USA.

In An Alien Land on Flickr.

Goblin Valley State Park, Utah, USA. Canon 6D, Sigma 15 mm fisheye lens at f2.8, 25 sec. exposure, ISO 6400. For perspective, most of the "HooDoo's or mounds in the image are 6-15 feet (2-5 meters) high. Hope you enjoy!

Goblin Valley at Night on Flickr.

Goblin Valley State Park, Utah, at Night with the Milky Way above. Walking through Goblin Valley at night is like walking through an alien land, erie and otherworldly. It's definately worth a visit! Canon 6D camera, Sigma 15mm fisheye lens, f 2.8, 30 sec exposure, ISO 6400. Hope you enjoy! The rock formations have been likened to Goblins. If you let your imagination run wild, you can imagine that the rising sun turned the Goblins into stone in some ancient time, and the passing eons have eroded them into these shapes. The place certainly has a lot of atmosphere especially at night

Ancient Bristlecone Pines on Flickr.

Ancient Bristlecone Pines in Bryce Canyon National Park, with the Milky Way above.