Astrophotography - Post your pictures here
- Thread starter Brewtus
- Start date
JDalcour
Observer
Thanks alot man, much appreciated. I'll have to gather all my favorites with my jeep in the foreground.
Stryder106
Explorer
WOW - these are all very cool photos. We just did Mojave Road and I tried to take a night sky pic - with absolutely no idea what I was doing - the 40 mph winds didn't help much. I am truly envious of your skillset. Canon DSLR 18mm 5sec ISO 1600. Horrible pic. I do have a question for you guys: How much of your image features is due to processing software? I only have what's in my pc - Windows Picture Manager.
another_mike
Adventurer
there is always some processing that goes on, some more than others... but you need to start with a good base. You say you have a Canon DSLR, but Canon makes different models all over the board. Shooting at 1600 on a T3i isnt going to be the same as shooting at 1600 on a 5D IV.... You mention 18mm, but what f stop? 5.6? 2.8? You need to gather that starlight. 5 seconds seems short, im usually around 15-20 seconds.
Watch some of those tutorials on youtube, search "Milky way photos". Personally, theres planning that goes into a great shot. Scoping the location beforehand, timing the moon cycle, sunrise, weather. Your location in the world and the time of year has a bearing on when youll even be able to view the Milky way.
Watch some of those tutorials on youtube, search "Milky way photos". Personally, theres planning that goes into a great shot. Scoping the location beforehand, timing the moon cycle, sunrise, weather. Your location in the world and the time of year has a bearing on when youll even be able to view the Milky way.
Hopeless Diamond
Explorer
Don't get a lot of opportunities to work on my skills, seems we're always in the trees and/or bring clouds along with us.
This was my first valid attempt. Good learning exercise, just wish I could play around more. Rock Creek, CA
Single shot, 5D3, 16mm F2.8, 20 sec
1R4A0214 by John Russell, on Flickr
95 shots. I missed cleaning up some plane trails on a few of them so some errant red streaks show through. Foreground is worthless too
Star Trails Rock Creek by John Russell, on Flickr
This was my first valid attempt. Good learning exercise, just wish I could play around more. Rock Creek, CA
Single shot, 5D3, 16mm F2.8, 20 sec
1R4A0214 by John Russell, on Flickr95 shots. I missed cleaning up some plane trails on a few of them so some errant red streaks show through. Foreground is worthless too
Star Trails Rock Creek by John Russell, on FlickrStryder,
Pictures like Joseph's Jeep picture that show a lot of detail in the milky way, have a quite a bit of processing. And, correct me if I'm wrong Joseph, but I would expect something like that uses StarStax or image averaging on the sky with a separately exposed foreground stitched in?
Hopeless Diamond's first shot is very much like what I would expect to see straight out of the camera. Processing on something like that would involve correcting chromatic aberration (see the stars that are stretched at the right and left parts of the picture?), some color temperature adjustment (for whatever reason, even when using the correct white balance, raw astros come out brown), noise reduction, and I would clone out some of the stray foreground objects that I assume got lit up by a flashlight. That said, I believe that was taken sometime out of the milky way season as we're seeing the dimmer end of the spiral arm. There's very little more that can be done on something like that and it'll never look like Joseph's Jeep picture because the subject isn't there. Also, I believe Joseph's picture is a stack of many pictures (doing that reduces background noise and brings a lot more detail out of the milky way.)
Unfortunately, Astro is one of those things that requires planning, equipment and software. There's actually very little "skill" involved, IMHO.
Regarding photo editors, check out Tony Northrups guide to free photo editors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWC-SAuYOzw
It is worth noting that even something so tamely edited as my panorama shot of Fort Rock (which has the edits I suggested to Hopeless Diamond's shot), is not really something you can see with the naked eye. That area is one of the darkest areas you can possibly be in, I was there when there was no moon, no clouds and it was insanely cold (cold = still air with little distortion). It was my first time shooting astro admittedly, and I didn't even realize I was shooting the milky way until it came out of my camera. Once you know it's there, you can kind of see some of the detail, but nothing like what a 1600 iso 30 second exposure will reveal even without editing. Astro is more of an art-form to create a beautiful representation of what is there, rather than necessarily recreating what you can see with the naked eye.
Also, always shoot in RAW with in-camera noise reduction turned off for Astro. The extra detail you get out of your sensor shooting RAW as opposed to JPEG is insane.
Pictures like Joseph's Jeep picture that show a lot of detail in the milky way, have a quite a bit of processing. And, correct me if I'm wrong Joseph, but I would expect something like that uses StarStax or image averaging on the sky with a separately exposed foreground stitched in?
Hopeless Diamond's first shot is very much like what I would expect to see straight out of the camera. Processing on something like that would involve correcting chromatic aberration (see the stars that are stretched at the right and left parts of the picture?), some color temperature adjustment (for whatever reason, even when using the correct white balance, raw astros come out brown), noise reduction, and I would clone out some of the stray foreground objects that I assume got lit up by a flashlight. That said, I believe that was taken sometime out of the milky way season as we're seeing the dimmer end of the spiral arm. There's very little more that can be done on something like that and it'll never look like Joseph's Jeep picture because the subject isn't there. Also, I believe Joseph's picture is a stack of many pictures (doing that reduces background noise and brings a lot more detail out of the milky way.)
Unfortunately, Astro is one of those things that requires planning, equipment and software. There's actually very little "skill" involved, IMHO.
Regarding photo editors, check out Tony Northrups guide to free photo editors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWC-SAuYOzw
It is worth noting that even something so tamely edited as my panorama shot of Fort Rock (which has the edits I suggested to Hopeless Diamond's shot), is not really something you can see with the naked eye. That area is one of the darkest areas you can possibly be in, I was there when there was no moon, no clouds and it was insanely cold (cold = still air with little distortion). It was my first time shooting astro admittedly, and I didn't even realize I was shooting the milky way until it came out of my camera. Once you know it's there, you can kind of see some of the detail, but nothing like what a 1600 iso 30 second exposure will reveal even without editing. Astro is more of an art-form to create a beautiful representation of what is there, rather than necessarily recreating what you can see with the naked eye.
Also, always shoot in RAW with in-camera noise reduction turned off for Astro. The extra detail you get out of your sensor shooting RAW as opposed to JPEG is insane.
In related news, I just picked up a Konova M1 Smart Controller with Pan/Tilt head and slider motor second hand for doing some much more serious timelapse work. Got it for a third of what it would have been new and it seems to be in nearly new condition.
Pan and Tilt work great, but the slider motor setup is specifically designed to work with Konova's Slider... and that's another $200 + $200 for the hand crank kit that the motor attaches to... I think I'm going to machine and fabricate a mount for the slider motor so it can be attached to my current slider. Then I can fit it to any type/size of slider I want and not be locked into one manufacturer.
Going to be putting together a list of days for this coming astro-season with optimal days (nights) and times for shooting. Will post it up once I get it finished. Also, y'all should check in over at the 2017 Solar Eclipse thread too, if you're into such things of course.
Pan and Tilt work great, but the slider motor setup is specifically designed to work with Konova's Slider... and that's another $200 + $200 for the hand crank kit that the motor attaches to... I think I'm going to machine and fabricate a mount for the slider motor so it can be attached to my current slider. Then I can fit it to any type/size of slider I want and not be locked into one manufacturer.
Going to be putting together a list of days for this coming astro-season with optimal days (nights) and times for shooting. Will post it up once I get it finished. Also, y'all should check in over at the 2017 Solar Eclipse thread too, if you're into such things of course.
NoOneBetter
Observer
NoOneBetter
Observer
Yes it is. I'm a noob when it comes to shooting the sky. Still not sure how to get good exposure without getting star trails like some of the photos above.
Kind of depends on what gear you have. Generally speaking, for full frame bodies, 600/focal length will give you the longest exposure you can do without significantly noticeable star trailing. 400/focal length for crop sensors. Using a rotating head or a tracking head will let you go longer, but will mess up your foreground.
The quality of the picture is then dictated by the "speed" and quality of your lens and the noise performance of the body. The larger the aperture, the lower the noise.
NoOneBetter
Observer
Thanks for the tips. Gear wise I've got a D750 and a couple wide lenses at F2.8 and F4. 120mm being farthest I can reach. I need to play around a bit more and figure out the ideal settings. I pretty much have never shot past sunset or without flashes.
So, I set out to get a timelapse looking up from the Devil's Punchbowl in Otter Crest, OR, but just as I got all my gear set up, the clouds rolled in... 
But while I was setting up, I was taking a couple snapshots to get the framing right and ended up with an ok still.
Devil's Punchbowl - S - January 15, 2016 19:30
Nikon D3300 - Rokinon 16mm - f/2.0 - ISO 400 - 25 seconds
Need to get a better lighting setup, but I think going back during the Milky Way season is going to be fantastic. The unfortunate part is that the area I was set up in is underwater at high tide, so you have to get a coincidence of Milky-Way elevation, low-tide, new moon, and clear weather... Perhaps a once in a lifetime shoot.
But while I was setting up, I was taking a couple snapshots to get the framing right and ended up with an ok still.
Devil's Punchbowl - S - January 15, 2016 19:30
Nikon D3300 - Rokinon 16mm - f/2.0 - ISO 400 - 25 seconds
Need to get a better lighting setup, but I think going back during the Milky Way season is going to be fantastic. The unfortunate part is that the area I was set up in is underwater at high tide, so you have to get a coincidence of Milky-Way elevation, low-tide, new moon, and clear weather... Perhaps a once in a lifetime shoot.
Last edited:
colorado matt
Adventurer
newb here also but thought I would share my attempt at loosing the star trails and getting more exposure time .... sorry its a little dusty sitting on the work bench waiting to be used for the first time ................this is my homemade star chaser ..... taking long exposure of the sky you will start to get trails after 30 seconds ... wanting more milky way and less trails .... found on the interweb this contraption ..... the whole thing screws to the tripod .... camera mounts on bolt coming out of the ball that is held fast with a plumbing fixture .... point the hinge at the north start and spin the handle 1 revolution per minute and it slowly lifts the top plate and compensates for the rotating earth ...this allows you to take a pic of the sky for longer periods of time without the tails ... lets more light in and much more impressive pics in the end ..... kinda cool little toy .... but quite tedious and delicate procedure to not make it wiggle I imagine..... enjoy ...Matt
