Antarctica

Antarctica
by ʇolɐǝz ǝɥʇ qoq

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

New answers tagged

1

You'll have to deal with reciprocity failure, otherwise known as the Schwarzschild effect. You'll also be limited to lower sensitivities (ISO) with most readily available film than with most digital cameras. With film you won't have any hot pixels, but faster film is grainier than slower film. Unless you're willing to invest in a fairly expensive sidereal ...


5

No, digital will be still better than film, because of its higher sensitivity and ease of use. All serious astronomy work moved to digital even before amateur dslr cameras appeared. Dead or hot pixels are usually not a problem because they can be eliminated during the processing - unlike regular photography, astrophotography is almost always a result of ...


5

The problem with film is that it's sensitivity reduces with the reduction of power of light source. This means that if you need exposure time x to get a satisfactory photograph, the light source with small power (i.e., magnitudes dimmer than day sky) y, you will need much more than N*x exposure time if you decide to photograph the same light source with ...


1

Mirek gave some excellent advice. A couple other things: important Make sure you've done your homework and determined the range of azimuth angles over which the sun will rise during this experiment. Make sure the camera covers this view angle. Make sure you start with the first sunrise at one edge of the view (and the expected final sunrise is at the ...


1

So you will need to either temporarily dedicate a camera for the project or you need to ensure that its position and angle of view are always the same. The DSLR will be probably best for this as it can be placed on a tripod. They also allow better control over exposure: you need to make sure that the sun is well separated from the sky... Many tripods come ...


0

How about a "beer can" camera? (You can also use one of those big energy drink cans if you can't have a beer can in your classroom.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp-JMGQUAMA http://www.pinholephotography.org/How%20to%20do%20it.htm http://www.pinholephotography.org/Solargraph%20instructions%202.htm


1

Yes you can do astrophotography in a humidity over 70%. In fact as an astro- photographer in England I would call 70% very low humidity. Problems can start occurring over 85% due to dew on the lens/telescope but a simple dew heater can solve that without much of a problem.


2

Well, it depends on how much desperate you are :-). This picture http://www.astrobin.com/253803/ has been taken with a moon approaching being full, and, by the way, it is muuuuch better than taking frames without the moon but with a poor sky (I wrote it in the comments too) I had no other options, since were I live the clear sky nights are few (strange, ...


0

my two cents: with high humidity, star disks in the photo are horrible! This is an example: http://www.astrobin.com/252070/B/ Picture looks ok but if you zoom you will see how orrible they are. This is not a focusing issue, it appears every time I try to make astrophotography with high humidity (> 80% reported by weather underground)


0

I could suggest you to use Stellarium app to see how the sky is going to be. This is really helpful in astrophotography



Top 50 recent answers are included