HOME | DD

Published: 2009-08-28 16:47:45 +0000 UTC; Views: 13784; Favourites: 1043; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
To purchase this image as an exclusive limited edition print please visit my website @ WWW.NATEZEMAN.COMThe Milky Way rises from behind a large sea stack on the Olympic Peninsula.
I usually don't do a lot of night photography, but this was the scene just a few feet from our campsite so I really couldn't pass it up. This is probably the most visible I've seen the milky way to my naked eye.
Second Beach - Olympic National Park - La Push, Washington
Please visit my WEBSITE for more prints @ WWW.NATEZEMAN.COM
Find me on FACEBOOK here: [link]
Follow me on TWITTER here: [link]
All images are Β©copyright Nate Zeman. You may NOT use, replicate, manipulate, or modify this image without my permission. All Rights Reserved.
Related content
Comments: 182
Originalbossman In reply to ??? [2009-08-28 21:01:35 +0000 UTC]
You've got to be shittin me Nate this is ridiculous. Freaking awesome composition.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to Originalbossman [2009-08-28 21:05:24 +0000 UTC]
thanks man. it took me about ten tries before i got a halfway centered sea stack and straight horizon. it was pretty pitch black
π: 0 β©: 1
Originalbossman In reply to Nate-Zeman [2009-08-29 12:38:24 +0000 UTC]
I cant seem to do night shots at all. Plus my 450d has way more noise than that 5d
π: 0 β©: 0
Tekkusu [2009-08-28 20:45:37 +0000 UTC]
Wow, it's breathtaking. I haven't been able to see a sky like that in ages. It makes you feel a little dwarfed, doesn't it?
π: 0 β©: 0
Starstallion In reply to ??? [2009-08-28 20:38:53 +0000 UTC]
wow that is amazing, I've ever seen anything like that before
π: 0 β©: 0
kindfullove12 In reply to ??? [2009-08-28 20:20:34 +0000 UTC]
gorgeous amazing shot of the big dipper indeed
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to kindfullove12 [2009-08-28 20:22:05 +0000 UTC]
ha its the milky way not the big dipper
π: 0 β©: 1
kindfullove12 In reply to Nate-Zeman [2009-08-29 01:10:53 +0000 UTC]
whoops xD i knew there was something wrong with my comment
π: 0 β©: 0
Kenny-Gulley In reply to ??? [2009-08-28 19:42:12 +0000 UTC]
this is absolutely spectacular my friend.
Wow
π: 0 β©: 0
Nookslider [2009-08-28 19:40:34 +0000 UTC]
I always wonder how you take a picture in the dark.
π: 0 β©: 0
artimusappleseed [2009-08-28 19:31:39 +0000 UTC]
Quality job. You should send this in to NASA's 'icture of the Day' archive.
π: 0 β©: 0
ScribalWriter [2009-08-28 19:23:50 +0000 UTC]
That is so completely beautiful. The vast scale of scars you captured is incredible. The clarity of the sky and just the atmosphere presented... wonderful. You really pushed the scope of how it feels to stand under the wide, open sky into the piece.
π: 0 β©: 0
JulesTheNorweegie [2009-08-28 19:08:31 +0000 UTC]
That is friggin` amazing! How did you do that?!
ItΒ΄s beyond me!
π: 0 β©: 0
orcafreak In reply to ??? [2009-08-28 18:59:01 +0000 UTC]
Absolutely beautiful. Stunning shot!
π: 0 β©: 0
Wuschelwoelfchen In reply to ??? [2009-08-28 18:49:25 +0000 UTC]
Wow, that's just beautiful <3 It almost looks like all those stars are smoke coming out of that...island...thing xD
π: 0 β©: 0
Sundri [2009-08-28 18:21:34 +0000 UTC]
I've been to that beach - though never with a view like that. *lol* <333 Absolutely STUNNING shot! <3
π: 0 β©: 0
LongJohnGold [2009-08-28 18:17:34 +0000 UTC]
Amazing clarity for such a short exposure time.
π: 0 β©: 0
Iamidaho [2009-08-28 17:58:55 +0000 UTC]
you just have to love the High ISO sensitivity of the 5d2..im imagining this is iso 6400 30 seconds wide open on your prime wide angle lens eh?
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to Iamidaho [2009-08-28 18:35:07 +0000 UTC]
yeah this was shot at 6400/30 seconds but i kinda blew it. i was using my wide angle at f4 and then changed to my 15mm fisheye. I somehow forgot that my fisheye was a 2.8 and kept on shooting at f4. so really im sure i could have got this same shot at 2.8 and 3200 iso. rookie move for sure
π: 0 β©: 1
StringOfLights In reply to Nate-Zeman [2009-08-28 19:29:13 +0000 UTC]
He's been gushing about the ISO of his 5d2 nonstop. My little Rebel XTi has been crying in the corner for a week now.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to StringOfLights [2009-08-28 19:33:14 +0000 UTC]
its got good iso performance for sure but its still a super noisy image
π: 0 β©: 1
StringOfLights In reply to Nate-Zeman [2009-08-28 20:07:46 +0000 UTC]
My Rebel just sniffled and went, "R-really?"
Aww, come here little Rebel... It's okay...
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to StringOfLights [2009-08-28 20:11:18 +0000 UTC]
haha this is probably the first time ever that ive even used a high iso on a camera so its not an incredibley useful feature to me
π: 0 β©: 1
StringOfLights In reply to Nate-Zeman [2009-08-28 20:31:32 +0000 UTC]
Okay now the Rebel is happy, even though you're full of crap.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to StringOfLights [2009-08-28 20:34:10 +0000 UTC]
how am i full of crap
π: 0 β©: 2
StringOfLights In reply to Nate-Zeman [2009-08-28 20:40:18 +0000 UTC]
Plus I'm just being annoying, but that goes without saying.
π: 0 β©: 0
StringOfLights In reply to Nate-Zeman [2009-08-28 20:39:18 +0000 UTC]
Because the shot is great, the noise is negligible, and you tried to soothe my poor camera's shattered ego. Comparing a Rebel XTi to a 5d2 is like comparing my west highland terrier to a wolf. Yeah, they're technically the same species, and my dog occasionally succeeds at catching her own dinner, but... Yeah. No.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to StringOfLights [2009-08-28 20:54:57 +0000 UTC]
the noise is much more noticeable at full resolution trust me.
π: 0 β©: 1
StringOfLights In reply to Nate-Zeman [2009-08-28 21:08:45 +0000 UTC]
I don't doubt it's noisy, it's more noticeable esp towards the bottom of the frame, but really, it's minor.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to StringOfLights [2009-08-28 21:12:54 +0000 UTC]
its really my first attempt at a star shot so im happy with it
π: 0 β©: 1
Jacob-Routzahn In reply to Nate-Zeman [2009-10-15 19:30:25 +0000 UTC]
you should be happy. I shoot night shots with an XTi too and the only way I can get a shot w/o a bunch of noise is ISO 200. I mean, it still is noisy, but it doesn't kill the image. The only issue is that I can never take just a still shot of the stars, it is always a time laps shot of 30 min or longer. This shot is absolutely terrific. I have just hit the tip of the iceberg on some of your pictures and am excited to look through your gallery.
π: 0 β©: 0
LemnosExplorer [2009-08-28 17:58:53 +0000 UTC]
wow, may i ask is it 10mm fishey (rectangle frame) or circular with PC correction afterwords ? Any time record for exposure and iso ?
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to LemnosExplorer [2009-08-28 18:35:28 +0000 UTC]
this was shot with a 15mm fisheye at iso 6400 for 30 seconds
π: 0 β©: 0
Ellygator [2009-08-28 17:49:25 +0000 UTC]
This is stunning! Would you consider offering it as a print?
π: 0 β©: 0
Vesrek [2009-08-28 17:43:50 +0000 UTC]
Wow, I never knew you could capture the stars in such splendid detail. Awesome work.
π: 0 β©: 0
superchipmunk [2009-08-28 17:34:44 +0000 UTC]
So beautiful. That makes me want to drive out to the Peninsula right now.
π: 0 β©: 0
michael-dalberti [2009-08-28 17:18:16 +0000 UTC]
very nice shot nate. i have some star pics from y-stone but i don't have a good noise reducing program.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to michael-dalberti [2009-08-28 18:35:48 +0000 UTC]
this one is fairly noisy but it looks good small
π: 0 β©: 0
PaulGana [2009-08-28 17:17:20 +0000 UTC]
great shot, I just wish you would have posted the EXIF data so I can know how you did this shot, or is this shot a secret???????
π: 0 β©: 1
Nate-Zeman In reply to PaulGana [2009-08-28 18:35:59 +0000 UTC]
iso 6400 for 30 seconds
π: 0 β©: 0
<= Prev | | Next =>