Tips for [road] photos at night

[TravelingBethelite]

Do you have any?

If there's one thing I've observed, that it's best to point the flash slightly to the left or right of the sign, so you get the sign, but not just a blob of reflected light.

[Alex]

Do you have any?

If there's one thing I've observed, that it's best to point the flash slightly to the left or right of the sign, so you get the sign, but not just a blob of reflected light.

Stand outside with a tripod, otherwise its a crapshoot and mostly not worth attempting.

[jeffandnicole]

Do you have any?

If there's one thing I've observed, that it's best to point the flash slightly to the left or right of the sign, so you get the sign, but not just a blob of reflected light.

Mostly, we get a blob of blurriness.

[Jim]

For whatever reason, the only camera I've had that has any hope of getting night road photos at night was my Sony Mavica FD-7 in the late '90s (yes, the one that took floppy disks!).  Everything since, I am lucky to get anything other than a blur.

[dgolub]

My experience is that taking pictures at night while in motion is largely a lost cause.  Twilight is doable with a good camera, but as it gets darker I find that I reach a point where I'm not getting any decent pictures anymore.

[Thing 342]

My experience with night photos has been a crapshoot as well, however my most recent camera (my phone, a Nexus 6P) has done fairly well in night shots. With older cameras (such as my Nexus 4 which used to be my primary road camera), I found that I could get night shots that looked ok, albeit at low resolution due to the fact that graininess increases exponentially the later it gets.

[Brian556]

Idea: use telephoto lens, shoot from farther back so the flash won't be as bright when it hits the sign. Also, you can record video using just the headlights for illumination, and screenshot the sign. That's sometimes the only way to get it to work from a moving vehicle.

Another idea would be to reduce the brightness of the flash by taping a few layers of window tint scraps over it.

[oscar]

With a digital SLR that can be pushed to a very high ISO (at least 6400), you can get a decent handheld shot (standing still, not on the move) of a sign with only street lighting, and no flash. The angle of the nearest street light can make the shot imperfect, but better than nothing.

For an example (shot at ISO 6400 without flash, aperture f/3.2, 24mm focal length of a 24-70mm zoom, shutter speed 1/10 second which was suboptimal for a handheld shot but it worked anyway):

[formulanone]

If there's one thing I've observed, that it's best to point the flash slightly to the left or right of the sign, so you get the sign, but not just a blob of reflected light.

Stand outside with a tripod, otherwise its a crapshoot and mostly not worth attempting.

Basically, this! Reflective components in signs are really tricky to photograph with a flash at night; it's really hard for auto-focus to pinpoint a dim item, and then the reflected light from a sign becomes mistranslated as near-direct sunshine, according to the light meter. It goes nuts.

If you have a DSLR with flash exposure compensation, then that helps...I usually set it to -1/3 to reduce hot spots.

At very low-light (nearly night): 1/6s, f/5.6, ISO 400, 50mm lens, daylight white balance (again, personal preference when using a flash). I held the camera steady and took about six shots. I didn't want to lose the disappearing background lighting, but you need a light source to bring out the sign's detail:



Highlights get a little blown out, so it's nicer to have a dim, rather than a completely black background, to diminish the halo effect.

1/30 second, f/3.5, ISO 400, 24mm
White balance setting at fluorsecent (gives you purple/lavender clouds at sunset, doesn't tint white flash light outdoors):



If there's a less-reflective component to the signage, angling the shot works better. Sometimes the sign is mounted high enough that you have to do this...1/160s, f/3.2, 50mm, ISO 200, WB Flash



In a moving vehicle...obviously, don't use flash! Whereas you can't get sharp close-ups of moving road signs in daylight without shutter speeds above 1/400-1/640 of a second, forget about all that with nighttime photos, without resorting to really high ISO shots, which have many color and sharpness imperfections in them. You can take some of that out in post-processing, but that's also a guessing game.

I also find that most flash operation won't even work at shutter speeds faster than 1/200 sec (most point-and-shoot cameras operate flash at 1/15-1/60 seconds), and the movement of the vehicle will cause a blur, the flash timing plus the autofocus-interpreted distance has not compensation...more blurriness.

Your best bet is to shoot the object further away without flash, so you can get sharper shots at 1/60-1/120 of a second, at ISO 800 to ISO 1600.

1/50s, f/5, 27mm, ISO 1600, Fluorescent WB:


1/250s, f/5.6, 55mm, ISO 800, Tungsten WB (incandescent light):


1/100s, f/3.2, 50mm, ISO 1600, WB (Auto setting):


Another drawback to night photography is when bright light sources rebound and reflect off the windshield, or off the shape of the lens. Sometimes you can edit it out, other times, it's stuck there:



Personally, I prefer the "golden hour". It can even extend to 90-120 minutes with road photography, depending on which direction you're travelling relative to the sun. The lighting is so much more interesting, because the sky can represent 30-70% of the background in road photography!











I only prefer ISO 3200 for nighttime aerial photography, because you can clean up and remove the undesirable noise easier, and the high contrast is usually preferable as a trade-off to get a faster shutter speed. Otherwise, there's too much contrast, grain, and image sensor dust which appears in the final shot.



With a point-and-shoot, or a cell-phone...good luck. I don't use the first much for road shots, and even less for cellphones.

I lucked out once with this shot, taken with a borrowed Canon Powershot, which ate a set batteries for every 30-40 shots:



In short, there's a lot to experiment with, you might have to adjust many settings to get desirable results, tinker with a little in post-processing, and still have a lower "batting average" than daytime lighting. But sometimes the results are really nice. Tripods take away a lot of guesswork, although using a flat, steady surface (for example, the roof, hood, or front cowl of your car) helps.

[Alps]

I've had a lot of different experiences.

*Night, while moving: Flash. Aim at least 20 degrees off center - take at the last possible moment you think you can get the sign. Same goes for overhead - you want to be as close to underneath as possible. Alternatively, you can zoom from far away and it will work almost as well, but you lose some resolution. My biggest problem has been the focus hitting the windshield instead of the sign. You want to manually set to about 30 feet, if possible.
*Night, while stopped: I use flash for reflective objects, which gives them the best chance of appearing at night like they would during the day. In this case, it's easy to set up off center. If there are non-reflective objects, or objects of different reflectivity, avoid flash. Canon cameras have a "P" program mode that lets you set at least 8 seconds on your shot. I find for anything above about 1/4 second you more or less need a tripod for a clear shot, but I've gotten reasonably clear shots up to 1 second without one, as well as blurry shots at even 1/20 second. The tripod can be anything stabilizing, the point is you're not holding the camera (except with one finger if it's windy).
*Twilight, while stopped: Use flash into the direction of the setting sun, because the brightness of the sky will wash out whatever you're photographing (unless your camera is hyper-advanced). Otherwise avoid flash.
*Twilight, while moving: You're screwed. If you don't use flash, you're guaranteed blur. If you do use flash, you end up with a dual image. The reason that doesn't happen at night is that the background is too dark to show up at the end of the exposure, but that's not the case during twilight. I do end up using flash for all reflective shots, and I don't use flash for all faraway shots (scenery, sunset/rise), but there are a number of shots I simply can't get during this time, for example a non-reflective sign where I can't safely stop for a few seconds.

[Duke87]

I'm not a fan of flash photography in general and would consider it outright verboten while in a moving car. I find the flashes of light startling and distracting even when I am expecting them, and if I'm driving startling distractions are not a good thing.

I am probably more sensitive to this than is typical.

Personally, I give up on photographing anything while moving once the sun goes down. If it's something super important I can stop for it.

[Pete from Boston]

I'm not a fan of flash photography in general and would consider it outright verboten while in a moving car. I find the flashes of light startling and distracting even when I am expecting them, and if I'm driving startling distractions are not a good thing.

I am probably more sensitive to this than is typical.

Personally, I give up on photographing anything while moving once the sun goes down. If it's something super important I can stop for it.

I agree with all of this.  A flash can be a good fill effect on something non-reflective, but is pointless behind glass, and problematic with retroreflective signs.

I have not had an SLR since film, but it is really the way to go.  Flashes are for selfies of drunk girls.  Set up the shot, get a long exposure.  You'll be glad you did. 

[Rothman]

Flashes are for selfies of drunk girls.

I sense a double meaning...

[Pete from Boston]

Flashes are for selfies of drunk girls.

I sense a double meaning...

Not intended, but works for me.

[jeffandnicole]

Flashes are for selfies of drunk girls.

I sense a double meaning...

Just keeps getting better and better...

[Pete from Boston]

If there's one thing I've observed, that it's best to point the flash slightly to the left or right of the sign, so you get the sign, but not just a blob of reflected light.

Stand outside with a tripod, otherwise its a crapshoot and mostly not worth attempting.

Basically, this! Reflective components in signs are really tricky to photograph with a flash at night; it's really hard for auto-focus to pinpoint a dim item, and then the reflected light from a sign becomes mistranslated as near-direct sunshine, according to the light meter. It goes nuts.

If you have a DSLR with flash exposure compensation, then that helps...I usually set it to -1/3 to reduce hot spots.

At very low-light (nearly night): 1/6s, f/5.6, ISO 400, 50mm lens, daylight white balance (again, personal preference when using a flash). I held the camera steady and took about six shots. I didn't want to lose the disappearing background lighting, but you need a light source to bring out the sign's detail:

(Photos snipped)

Those are some beautiful shots you have there.