August 02, 2014, 06:18:31 AM

Author Topic: Milky Way  (Read 12752 times)

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2123
  • Could not wait for 7D2 so I got the 5D3
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2013, 12:41:43 PM »
I'd like to share a few.
This was the first opportunity for me to shot the Milky Way.  Living in an urban environment do not allow for dark night sky.  Was at the Pamlico River near the town of Aurora, NC., for a few days over Labor Day weekend.
These were shot with a 5D3 with a 24-70mm f/2.8 ver 1 at f/2.8 and ISO 3200.
The first was exposed for 15 seconds.
The second was exposed for 18 seconds.  The light over the horizon on the right was from Aurora.  Another in the middle was another small town.  The foreground was the remains of hurricane Sandy damaged dock illuminated by house lights from behind the camera.
The third one was a goof.  I set the lens at its wide end, fully extended, pointing vertically up.  It started to slide back to the telephoto end, and a cuss and a curse before I could stop the lens drift and close the shutter.  The effect was a bit like "warp speed".  Interesting in a way.  Exposure was for 35 seconds.
I love the 0.5697332199654399000012554354609487t6548489... warp speed photograph.  ;)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Milky Way
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2013, 12:41:43 PM »

lion rock

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 240
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #16 on: September 06, 2013, 12:51:35 PM »
Thanks, RPT.  Appreciate the compliments.
Sometimes we can appreciate our mistakes.  Not often.

I'd like to share a few.

The third one was a goof.  I set the lens at its wide end, fully extended, pointing vertically up.  It started to slide back to the telephoto end, and a cuss and a curse before I could stop the lens drift and close the shutter.  The effect was a bit like "warp speed".  Interesting in a way.  Exposure was for 35 seconds.
I love the 0.5697332199654399000012554354609487t6548489... warp speed photograph.  ;)

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2123
  • Could not wait for 7D2 so I got the 5D3
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #17 on: September 06, 2013, 01:05:53 PM »
Thanks, RPT.  Appreciate the compliments.
Sometimes we can appreciate our mistakes.  Not often.

I'd like to share a few.

The third one was a goof.  I set the lens at its wide end, fully extended, pointing vertically up.  It started to slide back to the telephoto end, and a cuss and a curse before I could stop the lens drift and close the shutter.  The effect was a bit like "warp speed".  Interesting in a way.  Exposure was for 35 seconds.
I love the 0.5697332199654399000012554354609487t6548489... warp speed photograph.  ;)
Thank you. Many a discovery were made by "MISTAKE". The big deal is to identify the difference between the "known" and the "unknown"... So "Vive la différence!"

cellomaster27

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Capture the moment!
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #18 on: September 10, 2013, 01:15:33 AM »
Love the photo that was with the first post on this thread.. been trying to do something like that but my photos always look..boring?  Just the stars and lots of grey..  I get the general settings but am I missing something?  How did you get the blue??

Canon stuff

tpatana

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #19 on: September 10, 2013, 01:46:29 AM »
How did you get the blue??

I guess same way than I get most photos I like: dumb luck.

Other explanation could be WB-slider?

batotman

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #20 on: September 10, 2013, 01:50:04 AM »
Great shot, definitely enjoyed seein it.

Skulker

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 347
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #21 on: September 10, 2013, 01:56:50 AM »
Was this at f/1.4 aperture?  How long was the exposure?

As I mentioned above, F2 and 15 sec exposure.

I knew the 600-rule, but I thought 30 secs would be close enough. Pixel-peeping it wasn't, but I guess for web (at that size anyway) it would have been ok. But 15 sec came out nice too.

Ultimately all these so called rules are only someone else's idea of what works. I agree completely with your approach. You used the rule to start with as a guide, and modified you settings based on the results. To me that makes much more sense than trying to spend ages fiddling with maths.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Milky Way
« Reply #21 on: September 10, 2013, 01:56:50 AM »

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2123
  • Could not wait for 7D2 so I got the 5D3
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #22 on: September 10, 2013, 12:45:39 PM »
How did you get the blue??

I guess same way than I get most photos I like: dumb luck.

Other explanation could be WB-slider?
Yup! Use WB to cool the picture. Will get you bluish hues.

cellomaster27

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Capture the moment!
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #23 on: September 10, 2013, 05:03:53 PM »
How did you get the blue??

I guess same way than I get most photos I like: dumb luck.

Other explanation could be WB-slider?
Yup! Use WB to cool the picture. Will get you bluish hues.

Ah! Okay. I had a feeling but I only changed it a couple clicks. Tonight's gonna be a good night. :D
Canon stuff

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #24 on: September 10, 2013, 08:39:54 PM »
Love the photo that was with the first post on this thread.. been trying to do something like that but my photos always look..boring?  Just the stars and lots of grey..  I get the general settings but am I missing something?  How did you get the blue??

This one seems a tad underexposed.  Color shows up more with a brighter exposure...which is difficult to do unless you can shoot faster than f/2.8, or else have a longer exposure (or else shoot higher ISO)...but then you lose some contrast due to the air/atmosphere growing brighter while the stars do not (unless you're tracking on a polarie, but even with one the air grows a bit lighter than the subject over time).

jrista

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3752
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #25 on: September 10, 2013, 11:31:56 PM »
Love the photo that was with the first post on this thread.. been trying to do something like that but my photos always look..boring?  Just the stars and lots of grey..  I get the general settings but am I missing something?  How did you get the blue??

It all depends on how you process it. I ran your photo through photoshop, got the below result in about 2 minutes:

Added Levels Layer Adjustment:
  Blacks -> 17
  Grays -> 1.39
  Whites -> 121

Added Color Balance Layer Adjustment:
  Tones: Midtones
  Cyan/Red: -25
  Magenta/Green: +2
  Yellow/Blue: +66

My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 5D III | Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: SBIG STT-8300M | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

cellomaster27

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Capture the moment!
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #26 on: September 11, 2013, 02:39:29 AM »
Love the photo that was with the first post on this thread.. been trying to do something like that but my photos always look..boring?  Just the stars and lots of grey..  I get the general settings but am I missing something?  How did you get the blue??

This one seems a tad underexposed.  Color shows up more with a brighter exposure...which is difficult to do unless you can shoot faster than f/2.8, or else have a longer exposure (or else shoot higher ISO)...but then you lose some contrast due to the air/atmosphere growing brighter while the stars do not (unless you're tracking on a polarie, but even with one the air grows a bit lighter than the subject over time).

Agree.  I shot that at f3.5, 30sec, iso3200.  Maybe 6400 iso.. Thanks for the tip!

Love the photo that was with the first post on this thread.. been trying to do something like that but my photos always look..boring?  Just the stars and lots of grey..  I get the general settings but am I missing something?  How did you get the blue??

It all depends on how you process it. I ran your photo through photoshop, got the below result in about 2 minutes:

Added Levels Layer Adjustment:
  Blacks -> 17
  Grays -> 1.39
  Whites -> 121

Added Color Balance Layer Adjustment:
  Tones: Midtones
  Cyan/Red: -25
  Magenta/Green: +2
  Yellow/Blue: +66



Wow! Thanks! It looks so much better!! :)) (I'm getting Lightroom in >8 days so... :D ) all you guys are so nice. Thanks!
Canon stuff

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2123
  • Could not wait for 7D2 so I got the 5D3
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #27 on: September 11, 2013, 01:11:17 PM »
How did you get the blue??

I guess same way than I get most photos I like: dumb luck.

Other explanation could be WB-slider?
Yup! Use WB to cool the picture. Will get you bluish hues.

Ah! Okay. I had a feeling but I only changed it a couple clicks. Tonight's gonna be a good night. :D
That song is not for taking pictures of stars!!!!  >:(

Leverage it.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Milky Way
« Reply #27 on: September 11, 2013, 01:11:17 PM »

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #28 on: September 11, 2013, 01:52:28 PM »
Love the photo that was with the first post on this thread.. been trying to do something like that but my photos always look..boring?  Just the stars and lots of grey..  I get the general settings but am I missing something?  How did you get the blue??

This one seems a tad underexposed.  Color shows up more with a brighter exposure...which is difficult to do unless you can shoot faster than f/2.8, or else have a longer exposure (or else shoot higher ISO)...but then you lose some contrast due to the air/atmosphere growing brighter while the stars do not (unless you're tracking on a polarie, but even with one the air grows a bit lighter than the subject over time).

Agree.  I shot that at f3.5, 30sec, iso3200.  Maybe 6400 iso.. Thanks for the tip!

Love the photo that was with the first post on this thread.. been trying to do something like that but my photos always look..boring?  Just the stars and lots of grey..  I get the general settings but am I missing something?  How did you get the blue??

It all depends on how you process it. I ran your photo through photoshop, got the below result in about 2 minutes:

Added Levels Layer Adjustment:
  Blacks -> 17
  Grays -> 1.39
  Whites -> 121

Added Color Balance Layer Adjustment:
  Tones: Midtones
  Cyan/Red: -25
  Magenta/Green: +2
  Yellow/Blue: +66



Wow! Thanks! It looks so much better!! :)) (I'm getting Lightroom in >8 days so... :D ) all you guys are so nice. Thanks!

I know you will enjoy LR, and there is other software specifically for astrophotography.  A list of those would be nice.  It can get very involved...I'm personally not at that point. 

F/3.5 (at least for a wide angle lens) is slower than ideal for shooting the Milky Way because of the noise...in my opinion...unless you're on a "polarie" or a piggy back telescope.

The only time I've been published in a national magazine (so far) was of one of my Milky Way shots...with an older crop camera, a Sigma lens, a Heliopan circular polarizer...at f/2.8 for about 40 seconds...with noise that was orders of magnitude higher than my current 6D.  I've since sold all the gear I used for that shot.

I honestly wish I could do more astro pictures.  But I don't get to travel much, and the air here is rarely very clear (thus when the sky is darkest)...other than when it is below freezing with a stiff wind...not ideal conditions for camera or me!  But then, conditions like that usually accompany a very dark sky, most places in the world...usually at altitude. 

Archangel72

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 79
  • Amateur on horizon!!! Brace yourselves for impact!
    • View Profile
    • Dreamstime
Re: Milky Way
« Reply #29 on: September 11, 2013, 02:38:20 PM »
These are my first steps in astrophotography (Milky Way and stars).

I know it could be much better than this, but this shots were taken near my hometown (light pollution was pretty intense).
Hopefully, my next shots will be far outside, in darker area, and they should "reveal" more light in the sky.

(light on the wooden house was from led light of my iPhone4s ).
Archangel72
Canon EOS 1Dx, 16-35 f2.8 L II, 70-200 f2.8 L II, Extender EF 2x III, Speedlite 600 EX-RT, Gitzo 3541L, Ballhead 3780QR, B&W S03 F-PRO Serie E 77mm & 82mm circular polarizer, SANDISK EXTREME PRO 16 GBx2, RODE stereo microphone, TC-80N3 timer cable remote control, Manfrotto PRO VII LINO collection

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Milky Way
« Reply #29 on: September 11, 2013, 02:38:20 PM »