Road Train !!!!!!!!!!

by Russell McMahon

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

58

I found this page while checking my stats on Flickr. (I'm the photographer that shot this photo) I thought I'd respond with details of how I created this image since I see multiple theories here. First - this is not a stacked exposure. The entire image is a single exposure (30 secs). I used a Nikon D700 DSLR at ISO 3200 to capture this image (at ...


39

Stars don't show up voluntarily on a photo. You need to tweak them a bit using photo editing tools on a computer. Best if you use RAW file format, and RAW-processing software to do this. JPEGs can be tweaked to show more stars, but with a lot less working room and result being of lesser quality. The likely JPEG image you get with the exposure settings you ...


31

Stars move. Like with any other movement, what we care about is how much they move on the sensor during exposure: A movement that occurs only within a single pixel is not a movement the sensor can capture, i.e. the movement appears frozen. But when movement takes a point across several pixels during the exposure, it will be visible as movement blur, in this ...


12

In order to photograph the milkyway you want to capture as much light as possible within a certain timeframe. This means: Highest ISO you think is acceptable with your body Widest aperture Shutter speed as long as possible, without setting it too long so you can see the movement So looking at your settings, indeed the aperture could have been wider, ...


12

Johann3s' answer is good, and covers all the basics. When it comes to the milky way, which is a form of ultra wide field night sky astrophotography, you want to use the highest ISO you can get away with, the longest exposure you can get away with, at the fastest aperture your lens supports. Here is a little bit more detail. The Technicalities Which ISO to ...


10

The rule of 600 states that to 'eliminate' star trails the exposure time in seconds should be 600 divided by the focal length of the taking lens. 20mm lens could go to 30 seconds, 300mm lens could go to 2 seconds. Of course (like any motion blur) you will never eliminate star trails- you merely reduce the trail to an acceptable level for a given ...


10

The photographer notes in the description: 'I separately captured the bridge about 2-3 shots with different exposure and blended them later with the star trails shot in Photoshop.' In other words, the bridge shots weren't 180 second exposures.


10

In fact, if you spend the night in a remote enough place with clear, moon-free sky you will see most of the colors. The sad truth is that most of us live in cities where light polution and smog do not let us see anything except the brightest stars.


10

Unfortunately, a lot of images like the one you show here are digitally altered and it is difficult to get comparable results. The image above shows the Milky Way, looking approximately at its center, which appears to us to be in the constellation of Sagittarius. To get such a detailed view of the comparatively dark nebulous structures, however, you need ...


10

Simple answer to your main question is: The Dynamic-range of the sensors of current digital camera is not yet a match for the dynamic range of human eye's sensor (aka retina). Detailed answer of "how to bring it up" will bring all the techniques on the table. The majors are: Widest possible aperture on lens, if possible f/1.8 or f/1.4 Widest angle: To ...


9

An equatorial mount and a computer controlled mount are two different things. A mount can also be both. A equatorial mount has one axis aligned with the spin of the earth (pointed towards Polaris for those north of the equator.) A computer controlled mount is a mount that knows where the objects in the sky are. You can say, "point at Jupiter" and it will ...


8

The light from such objects is nowhere near bright enough to cause damage to the sensor, however using really long exposures to capture dim distant stars could damage the sensor by overheating. Most modern DSLRs have heat sensors and cutoffs to prevent this, but if you're using an older camera and keeping the shutter open for hours with an external power ...


8

You can't see the colours in the milky way (or other stars for that matter) as the light coming from the milky way is too dim to be picked up by the cone cells in our eyes which distinguish colour. Instead the light only trips the more sensitive rod cells (which are usually used for detecting motion) hence we see the brightness but not the colour of the ...


8

Camera is better at seeing than our eyes. According to http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/cameras-vs-human-eye.htm astrophotographers have estimated that human eyes have a ISO rating of 500-1000 after being properly acclimated to dark conditions. The example photograph has used something like ISO 3200. Cameras can also take longer exposure (=gather ...


7

The "basic gear" is a digital camera and tripod. Point the camera at the sky for 30s with the aperture wide open at the maximum ISO setting. With the right atmospheric conditions and location you can get some surprisingly good results. Moving on from there a DSLR with RAW support (the 60D is fine) fast lens (such as a 50mm f/1.8) is advisable, as well as an ...


7

Its probably due to a narrow aperture. On professional grade lenses, you can usually stop down a bit and still maintain a rounded aperture, however on cheaper lenses, or on all lenses at very narrow apertures, the opening becomes polygonal. That causes the diffraction of light as it passes through the aperture to produce a star pattern (the exact nature of ...


7

I think the main cause of that effect is using a very small aperture. If you're trying to get a long exposure by stopping down to f/22 or smaller you'll most likely get that effect.


7

It is probably easier to talk about what qualities in a lens that often add significant cost that you don't need in order to do astrophotography. The first is Auto Focus. Stars are such tiny points of light that the accuracy of most AF systems is not quite good enough to resolve them to the absolute sharpest capability of the lens. Most AF systems can't ...


6

If you have an android phone with geolocation and compass, Google nightsky is outstanding. Or if you're on your computer http://www.google.com/sky/ google sky. I'm sure you could find better software for the task, but if you're just trying to get the milky way or a constellation or two, it will do the trick.


6

The moon is not anywhere close as bright as the sun (it's basically a giant diffuse, grey reflector), and so there is little risk. According to Wikipedia, the full moon at its brightest is about 400,000 times dimmer than the sun. That's 18 1/2 stops! However, the moon does tend to get overexposed in photographs, since it's hard to fill the frame without a ...


6

Finnish night sky is now dark enough to photograph stars (it is September now) so I went to try my first shots at stars. I have never tried to take a photo of stars before. My photos turned out even darker than yours, but I was more daring with my post-processing and I think I now know what is wrong with your photo. Post-processing! Naturally that is not ...


6

I don't think this is a tripod stability problem. The star trails are all straight, not wiggly as they would be if the camera where moving during or between each exposure. The dimmer stars are easy to see as nine distinct dots. None of the dots indicate camera movement during any of the nine exposures, and none of the lines of the nine dots for each star are ...


6

I agree with the comments made by JohannesD. It is easy to see that your tripod moved, when you magnify the picture of the stars. You can clearly see that the star trails are not small circle segments, instead they have an irregular curvature which is indicative of tripod movement instead of the usual trail casued by the rotation of the Earth. It is ...


5

This rule applies to the shutter speed you should use when taking photographs of the night sky. The rule is as follows: When using a lens of focal length L to take a long exposure photograph of the night sky (with a stationary camera), the maximum shutter speed you should use to avoid blurring of the stars is 600/L seconds. For example, if using a 300mm ...


5

This technique is called "Startrails" and you don't need to have a special camera. All you need is: - tripod - time-lapse control to shoot lot's of photos - fast lens (large aperture) - compass - startrails software (it's called Startrails.exe and you can find here) Your camera will shoot for a long time (it depends how is the effect do you wanna get, in ...


5

In Nikon DLSRs, including the D7000, there is image-processing software that removes noise and hot pixels, and this software has come to be known as "the star eater" because it interprets isolated bright pixels as noise and removes them or averages them into the background. Isolated bright pixels, of course, are kind of what you want to see when you're ...


5

At least three things conspired against you in that photo: The comparatively brightly-lit foreground. The clouds. Their movement during the exposure works to obstruct even more of the sky. The moon! It is suprisingly bright, especially when close to full as it was yesterday. Move away from artificial lights, especially the sort of horrible sodium vapor ...


4

This is a repeat of http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/25825/can-you-damage-your-eyes-viewing-venus No, there cannot be any damage, not to the camera and not to your eyes either. In the case of the moon and/or planets, there is not enough brightness to cause any damage, and the lens cannot increase the surface brightness. In the case of the stars, ...


4

There is a wonderful and hugely popular, open source, cross platform based software called Stellarium which is available at http://www.stellarium.org/. It is free and has tons of features. You can track almost every celestial object with it.



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible