Alley in Pisa, Italy

by Lars Kotthoff

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Take the 2-minute tour ×
Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

When looking at taking photos such as star trails where it requires a significant exposure time, is it more power efficient to use Bulb mode or taking multiple shorter exposures?

Would keeping the shutter open in Bulb mode for an hour over expose elements of the composition?

share|improve this question
    
Does this photo.stackexchange.com/questions/8092/… answer the question for you? –  John Cavan Jul 18 '13 at 0:42
    
    
I am aware of stacking, etc. I was more interested in the power usage of both methods. Would a 1 hour bulb exposure drain the battery quicker than multiple shorter exposures. –  Tim Jul 18 '13 at 0:49
    
This has a good related answer explaining the advantages of long exposure low iso vs short exposure high iso: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/40188/… –  kheric Jul 18 '13 at 14:28

1 Answer 1

Without actually testing, I am reluctant to say with absolute certainty, but I won't let that stop me -- I will just make a list of assumptions :-)

Assuming stacked exposures of the same total time as the single bulb exposure, that your are not using dark frame noise reduction, that sensor power efficiency does not get significantly worse as it heats up and that your camera does not violate the laws of physics, it is going to take (ever so slightly) more energy to perform multiple exposures, just because you have to move the mirror/shutter and the processor will have to work a little harder processing multiple images.

Of course there are plenty of other advantages to stacking, but I do not think power savings is one of them.

share|improve this answer
3  
Thanks. Seems legit. I'm reasonably certain my camera doesn't violate the laws of physics. I haven't seen it do anything I'd consider a violation. I wish it would though, that would be really interesting. –  Tim Jul 18 '13 at 3:24
    
There's other laws in work besides those that dictate the power usage of a system camera. The laws of battery drainage. There might be a small difference in it when you draw the power in one long haul instead of splitting it into a number of short stints. –  Esa Paulasto Aug 17 '13 at 14:41
    
I would also point out that one needs to achieve at least a minimum signal level to make stacking effective as well. If one needs a 180 second exposure, you could achieve that by either stacking ten 18-second exposures, or say 90 two-second exposures. The stacking the two second exposures will produce a complete image, however it will lack the color fidelity and certain nuances of detail that the ten 18-second exposures bring to the table. In other words, actual SNR trumps virtual SNR (if stacking say night sky photos is the goal.) –  jrista Aug 19 '13 at 2:13

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.