Milky Way

[batotman]

Great shot, definitely enjoyed seein it.

 

[Skulker]

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.

 

[rpt]

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]

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.

 

[CarlTN]

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]

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

 

[cellomaster27]

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... ) all you guys are so nice. Thanks!

 

[rpt]

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.

That song is not for taking pictures of stars!!!!

Leverage it.

 

[CarlTN]

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... ) 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]

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

 

[CarlTN]

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

As photographs they're nice to look at. As honest portrayals of the beauty of the Milky Way, I find them very lacking. The Milky Way is not a neon sign in the sky, in a cartoon. Even on "Futurama" the Milky Way looks more natural than your take on the subject. But I suppose there is a market for your style, or is there? Just curious...

 

[Archangel72]

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

As photographs they're nice to look at. As honest portrayals of the beauty of the Milky Way, I find them very lacking. The Milky Way is not a neon sign in the sky, in a cartoon. Even on "Futurama" the Milky Way looks more natural than your take on the subject. But I suppose there is a market for your style, or is there? Just curious...

Well, I think this is because stars looks nicer and with more vivid colors here in Croatia )
Come and check'em out, after shooting stars will head for beer and some "chevapchichi" (you should try that as well).
Here is the link for that cuisine:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%86evapi

 

[RGF]

very nice.

 

[CarlTN]

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

As photographs they're nice to look at. As honest portrayals of the beauty of the Milky Way, I find them very lacking. The Milky Way is not a neon sign in the sky, in a cartoon. Even on "Futurama" the Milky Way looks more natural than your take on the subject. But I suppose there is a market for your style, or is there? Just curious...

Well, I think this is because stars looks nicer and with more vivid colors here in Croatia )
Come and check'em out, after shooting stars will head for beer and some "chevapchichi" (you should try that as well).
Here is the link for that cuisine:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%86evapi

Thanks very much for the invite...that does look like it would be tasty! I wish I could travel the world...Europe, and eastern Europe...would be high on my list. I've heard Croatia has beautiful landscape...

I would like to see an F1 race in Budapest...and then tour the area. Preferably before F1 racing goes the way of the dinosaur and gets replaced by al gore's clones racing solar sail powered bumper cars at amusement parks!! It sounds silly but it sure feels like racing is heading in that direction...

 

[cellomaster27]

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.

That song is not for taking pictures of stars!!!!

Leverage it.

Ahahaha!! You caught it!

 

[rpt]

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.

That song is not for taking pictures of stars!!!!

Leverage it.

Ahahaha!! You caught it!

So it seems I am not alone. (Not a compliment though . )

 

[joshmurrah]

Here's a recent shot of mine... had a good opportunity while at a beach condo facing the Gulf of Mexico on a moonless night.

Canon 5D3, 16-35 f/2.8L II - ISO 3200, f/2.8, 16mm, 30 seconds (right around the 600 rule)
Within Adobe PS CS6' ACR tool: cooled the temp to 3300K w/ -2 tint, contrast +98, clarity +48, vibrance/saturation both +21, +52 NR w/ 82 detail, and a very slight crop.

Hope you guys enjoy and find the details helpful.

 

[Wildfire]

Here's a recent shot of mine... had a good opportunity while at a beach condo facing the Gulf of Mexico on a moonless night.

Canon 5D3, 16-35 f/2.8L II - ISO 3200, f/2.8, 16mm, 30 seconds (right around the 600 rule)
Within Adobe PS CS6' ACR tool: cooled the temp to 3300K w/ -2 tint, contrast +98, clarity +48, vibrance/saturation both +21, +52 NR w/ 82 detail, and a very slight crop.

Hope you guys enjoy and find the details helpful.

Awesome shot and thank you for the processing information.

 

[badgerpiper]

Found a dark spot in the middle of nowhere and got lucky with some car lights!

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Here's a recent shot of mine... had a good opportunity while at a beach condo facing the Gulf of Mexico on a moonless night.

Canon 5D3, 16-35 f/2.8L II - ISO 3200, f/2.8, 16mm, 30 seconds (right around the 600 rule)
Within Adobe PS CS6' ACR tool: cooled the temp to 3300K w/ -2 tint, contrast +98, clarity +48, vibrance/saturation both +21, +52 NR w/ 82 detail, and a very slight crop.

Hope you guys enjoy and find the details helpful.

AWESOME ... the details are indeed very helpful ... thanks for sharing.