# Night shot including milky way. Any tricks?



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

I haven't really spent much time thinking about it yet but I am often impressed with night shots featuring the milky way above some point of interest on the ground.

The most recent one I saw was that, above Durdle Door.

What are the considerations to take into account for achieving such an image?


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

Answering part of my own question, I suppose I have to know that it will be there when I am. Off to look at the photographers ephemeris to see if that would help there


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I haven't really spent much time thinking about it yet but I am often impressed with night shots featuring the milky way above some point of interest on the ground.
> 
> The most recent one I saw was that, above Durdle Door.
> 
> What are the considerations to take into account for achieving such an image?


Use a tripod


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

> The Photographer's Ephemeris 3D (TPE 3D) is a unique natural light visualization tool for outdoor and landscape photographers. It’s a 3D map-centric Sun, Moon and Milky Way calculator: see how the light will fall on the land, day or night, for any location on earth.
> 
> We plan to soft launch TPE 3D in select markets (including Ireland and New Zealand) on Tuesday, June 20 2017.
> 
> ...


The Photographer's Ephemeris: Announcing The Photographer's Ephemeris 3D

Looks like I am not in luck there quite yet.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Use a tripod


Thanks ..


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Thanks ..


Yeh you're welcome


----------



## RoyReed (Jun 24, 2017)

A guy I know in Cornwall has done some nice ones on Bodmin Moor.

nickreaderphotography.com/milky-way-above-roughtor-on-bodmin-moor/

The Milky Way  @  Nick Reader Photography


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

Thanks RoyReed, those look nice.

eta: I see he is saying a 20s exposure and using flash to light the ground interest.

I think I know that really long exposures are out because it is all moving and all I would get is trails.

The TPE is saying a moonless night and low light pollution.

If I use high ISO I may get too much noise, there must bet a sweet spot between low iso long exposure and higher is faster shutter.


----------



## RoyReed (Jun 24, 2017)

Oh, and February to September on a clear night with a new moon in a location with no light pollution, point camera to the south (if you're shooting in the UK).


----------



## RoyReed (Jun 24, 2017)

This site has good tips.

How to Photograph the Milky Way in 12 Steps (With 6 Epic Examples)


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

RoyReed said:


> Oh, and February to September on a clear night with a new moon in a location with no light pollution, point camera to the south (if you're shooting in the UK).


Is it always in the south? My knowledge of the stars is well, pretty non existant


----------



## RoyReed (Jun 24, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Is it always in the south? My knowledge of the stars is well, pretty non existant


Yes, if you're in the northern hemisphere. Same with the sun, moon or planets - they always appear in the southern half of the sky (with the exception of just before setting or just after rising when they might creep above due east/west).


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

RoyReed said:


> This site has good tips.
> 
> How to Photograph the Milky Way in 12 Steps (With 6 Epic Examples)


That is a great find, thanks so much. 

I have a 20mm f2.8 lens that might do, but my current camera only goes up to ISO1600 and is quite noisy at that level. It is fine at 800 but that might not be enough.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

I am going to need some ground based items of interest for this


----------



## RoyReed (Jun 24, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I am going to need some ground based items of interest for this


For the first time I'd just concentrate on getting the sky right.

Take a torch with a dark red filter (just tape on some red sellophane) so you don't mess up your night vision once your eyes get adapted to the dark.

And make sure you fully charge your camera batteries (you do have a spare don't you) as the long exposures will drain it more quickly.

And dress warm - it'll be cold at three in the morning even on the hottest summer's day.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

I have two sets of batteries yes, I didn't know about the red torch thing so that is a neat idea. Is there any reason you say 3am RoyReed, could I not get the same shot at 11pm?


----------



## RoyReed (Jun 24, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I have two sets of batteries yes, I didn't know about the red torch thing so that is a neat idea. Is there any reason you say 3am RoyReed, could I not get the same shot at 11pm?


You might be OK with 11pm in February, but for most of the summer it'll only just be fully dark then. I wouldn't think of starting before about midnight. And although you can get a completely clear night sky at any time of year it's more likely in the summer.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

RoyReed said:


> You might be OK with 11pm in February, but for most of the summer it'll only just be fully dark then. I wouldn't think of starting before about midnight. And although you can get a completely clear night sky at any time of year it's more likely in the summer.


Aha, I understand what you mean now, yes I suppose I have to have proper darkness.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

So in summary, high ISO (in my case 1600 is max) a wide fast lens (20mm f2.8, actually not so wide on a crop sensor), 20 second exposure or perhaps more for me as I don't have that high an iso, pointing to the south (I may need to get a compass), when the sky is fully dark (clear of clouds and no or only a small moon), ideally away from street or city light pollution, and using a red torch so as not to spoil night vision. 

I think you are right RR about trying to get a sky shot to work before worrying about on the ground interest.


----------



## RoyReed (Jun 24, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Aha, I understand what you mean now, yes I suppose I have to have proper darkness.


Yes, you really do. And allow half an hour for your eyes to fully adapt.

When you look at the sky, be aware that your peripheral vision will be better for night vision than the centre of your field of view. This is because the fovea has almost no rod cells which are the ones that see in black and white and are much more sensitive to low light. After a while you can get used to looking at stars just outside the centre of your field of view.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

I suppose for a sky shot I can set the lens to infinity which will deal with focussing.

I am going to have to check the cloud cover on Friday and Saturday nights, and work out a suitable location, not too far away, for minimum ambient night light pollution.

eta: and I need to check for non moonlight nights, I wonder if my sailing buddies would know about that..


----------



## RoyReed (Jun 24, 2017)

weltweit said:


> eta: and I need to check for non moonlight nights, I wonder if my sailing buddies would know about that..


Photographer's ephemeris will tell you this.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 24, 2017)

Hmm, there are some pretty special shots out there:
photographs including the milky way - Google Search

This photographer has some very nice examples including light painting of objects in the foreground:
Landscape Astrophotography | Milky Way Photos

And closer to home, nice shots from the Dorset coast including one of Durdle Door:
5 amazing photos of the Milky Way above Britain

and this is his website: DorsetScouser Photography – Dorset as you've never seen it before


----------



## weltweit (Jun 25, 2017)

I forgot a tip. If I am going to have to wait for a moonless night without clouds, to drive perhaps for some time to a special location and spend most of the night there making pictures. And it is possible these conditions might not recur for months, shoot raw!


----------



## mauvais (Jun 25, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I suppose for a sky shot I can set the lens to infinity which will deal with focussing.


Yes, but don't do it manually. Just autofocus on something far away but still on the same planet, it's effectively the same.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 25, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Yes, but don't do it manually. Just autofocus on something far away but still on the same planet, it's effectively the same.


I doubt there will be that much to focus on in the middle of the night 

Having trouble getting a raw file converter for my Fuji Finepix S2 Pro RAF files. At least there are some but none of them are free. I am stingy having shot jpeg so long and being about to upgrade.
eta no it is fine Elements 9 will open them.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 25, 2017)

Also, star location and movement is entirely predictable given a date, time and location. So there's a load of software that can do things like eliminate or extend trails and build up composite shots from multiple shorter exposures. I haven't used them myself but things like DeepSkyStacker are worth a look.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 25, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I doubt there will be that much to focus on in the middle of the night
> 
> Having trouble getting a raw file converter for my Fuji Finepix S2 Pro RAF files. At least there are some but none of them are free. I am stingy having shot jpeg so long and being about to upgrade.


Any distant visible object will work and be easier to focus on than stars, and by 'distant' we're really talking a handful of metres, depending on the lens. You can probably illuminate something suitable with the AF assist light.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 25, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Also, star location and movement is entirely predictable given a date, time and location. So there's a load of software that can do things like eliminate or extend trails and build up composite shots from multiple shorter exposures. I haven't used them myself but things like DeepSkyStacker are worth a look.


That sounds interesting.

I also want to shoot the rotation of the stars at some point above some point of interest on the ground and while I have bulb mode on my camera I have been advised noise will buildup and that it might be better to take a series of shots and blend them in PS.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 25, 2017)

weltweit said:


> That sounds interesting.
> 
> I also want to shoot the rotation of the stars at some point above some point of interest on the ground and while I have bulb mode on my camera I have been advised noise will buildup and that it might be better to take a series of shots and blend them in PS.


Yes, this is good advice.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 25, 2017)

I have no doubt raw is the way to go for night time shots where I am likely to want to bring back detail from dark areas but I am not impressed by my camera's raw files.

I usually shoot 6mpx jpeg fine which was, way back, recommended as the best compromise for my camera. I just experimented with 12mpx .raf raw files and I don't like them much. There seems all sorts of sensor noise in the out of focus backgrounds. Oh well...


----------



## editor (Jun 25, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Use a tripod


It's a lot more complicated than just sticking the camera on a tripod.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 26, 2017)

I am playing around with my camera's raw files. I usually get 52, 6mpx jpegs per 256mb Smart Media card. 12mpx raws are 13mb each, so I only get 9 per card. I have 4 cards though so that should be enough for one nights worth of images.


----------



## editor (Jun 26, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I am playing around with my camera's raw files. I usually get 52, 6mpx jpegs per 256mb Smart Media card. 12mpx raws are 13mb each, so I only get 9 per card. I have 4 cards though so that should be enough for one nights worth of images.


Why are you using such small capacity cards? Big capacity cards are as cheap as chips now (check out 7dayshop.com)


----------



## weltweit (Jun 26, 2017)

editor said:


> Why are you using such small capacity cards? Big capacity cards are as cheap as chips now (check out 7dayshop.com)


TBF I forget what format my second card slot is. I have been using 256mb Smart Media cards since I got the camera. I will try and find out what format the other slot is.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 26, 2017)

The second slot is for a Microdrive.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 26, 2017)

Actually I was wrong, my SmartMedia cards are 128mb and that is the largest they ever made.


----------



## editor (Jun 26, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Actually I was wrong, my SmartMedia cards are 128mb and that is the largest they ever made.


Curse those obsolete formats!


----------



## mauvais (Jun 26, 2017)

You need a new camera  

Seriously, high ISO/low noise/noise reduction has come so far even in the last few years that a camera from 2002 is going to leave you on the back foot from the start. If budget's an issue try MPB for used stuff.


----------



## editor (Jun 26, 2017)

mauvais said:


> You need a new camera
> 
> Seriously, high ISO/low noise/noise reduction has come so far even in the last few years that a camera from 2002 is going to leave you on the back foot from the start. If budget's an issue try MPB for used stuff.


Definitely. Despite the smaller sensor, the low light performance from my OM-D completely blew away my Nikon D300.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 26, 2017)

Even the D300 (still my camera) is passable at sky shots once processed, and costs about £200 used now. I was going to say it'll depend on what he wants to do with lenses but the old Fuji stuff is Nikon fit, right?


----------



## mauvais (Jun 26, 2017)

Also you can apparently put a 2GB CompactFlash card in an S2.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 26, 2017)

mauvais & editor I am at the moment saving my pennies for a new camera, well it will be a used one. Currently I am considering a 24mpx Nikon D610 or a 36mpx Nikon D800. Image files will be massive though so I will probably need also to upgrade my computer shortly afterwards. But either one of those should monster milky way pictures


----------



## weltweit (Jun 26, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Also you can apparently put a 2GB CompactFlash card in an S2.


Aha, I think I heard something like that, are you sure?


----------



## mauvais (Jun 26, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Aha, I think I heard something like that, are you sure?


No, but that's what a quick Google suggested. The 'Microdrive' slot is certainly physically compatible with CF cards.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 26, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Even the D300 (still my camera) is passable at sky shots once processed, and costs about £200 used now. I was going to say it'll depend on what he wants to do with lenses but the old Fuji stuff is Nikon fit, right?


Yes my S2 Fuji is Nikon F-mount and I have 5 F-mount FX format lenses which I am hoping will still look good on my next camera.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 26, 2017)

My S2 is fairly clean where there is some light: (this was a jpeg)


----------



## weltweit (Jun 26, 2017)

But it is fairly noisy in the dark:


A section of that:


----------



## weltweit (Jul 3, 2017)

editor said:


> Curse those obsolete formats!


I today got a 2gb CF II card which boosts my options quite a bit. 2gb equates to 153 raws or 832 2.4mb 6mpx jpegs. Now I just have to find a CF card reader.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 3, 2017)

On the new (to me) camera front, it seems Nikon may announce a replacement to the D810, in July, which could do interesting things to used prices of various models. I think I am going to hold my horses at least until then.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 6, 2017)

I got my card reader today so shot some pictures, I shot 12 mpx raw and 6mpx jpeg at ISO400, resized them to 900x600px and applied the same sharpening. Cant tell which is which. 

eta, that probably isn't the best way to compare them. I will have a think.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 25, 2017)

I am seeing milky way photographs almost every visit to the internet these days, and quite a lot are very good. Didn't realise it was so common as a subject.

eta: and Nikon USA has just announced the D850 with a video of a couple of photographers out at night with the new camera taking pictures of the milky way.


----------



## weltweit (Apr 26, 2018)

Last Friday at about 11pm I suddenly thought, there were no clouds, tonight could be the night! but I hadn't things prepared so I decided to go to bed instead and try on Saturday night. Of course on Saturday night the clouds were back. The Friday night had a moon, but clear skies, could have been an opportunity missed! Grrrr


----------



## Infidel Castro (Apr 26, 2018)

Urban 75 photo trip! Book it in. Beacons on a moonless clear night.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 23, 2018)

So, to update the thread. I now have a new FF camera (D800) which has great high ISOs and I just bought a cable release for bulb exposures, I toyed with night photos (see Severn Bridge in photo thread). Now I am going to try for star trails which need about a 1 hour exposure. I am going to try to shoot the Severn bridge again, with star trails which is tricky because the bridge is so brightly lit and I don't want massive brightness to spoil the scene.

I think to get good star trails I will need something like f5.6 ISO not sure, for 10 minutes (multiplied by 6) but the bridge looks best with ISO400 f8 and 20 seconds. So I am planning to try to make a composite image. The bridge from the 20s exposure and the star trails from 6 x 10 minute exposures. I have been learning about layers and layer masks for this which was fun. My son is amazed that I never learnt about layers before, but I just never had the need.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 23, 2018)

weltweit said:


> So, to update the thread. I now have a new FF camera (D800) which has great high ISOs and I just bought a cable release for bulb exposures, I toyed with night photos (see Severn Bridge in photo thread). Now I am going to try for star trails which need about a 1 hour exposure. I am going to try to shoot the Severn bridge again, with star trails which is tricky because the bridge is so brightly lit and I don't want massive brightness to spoil the scene.
> 
> I think to get good star trails I will need something like f5.6 ISO not sure, for 10 minutes (multiplied by 6) but the bridge looks best with ISO400 f8 and 20 seconds. So I am planning to try to make a composite image. The bridge from the 20s exposure and the star trails from 6 x 10 minute exposures. I have been learning about layers and layer masks for this which was fun. My son is amazed that I never learnt about layers before, but I just never had the need.



Can’t you just stop the lens right down to allow a longer exposure, or use a ND filter?


----------



## weltweit (Jun 23, 2018)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Can’t you just stop the lens right down to allow a longer exposure, or use a ND filter?


What I think, and will become apparent more on the night, is that I need a wide aperture (and perhaps a higher ISO) to collect lots of stars for the trails. But that means the bridge blowing out big time.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 23, 2018)

weltweit said:


> What I think, and will become apparent more on the night, is that I need a wide aperture (and perhaps a higher ISO) to collect lots of stars for the trails. But that means the bridge blowing out big time.



Yeah the problem is the bridge being lit. Not sure how you get around that but an ND filter allows longer shutter speeds for wider apertures.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 23, 2018)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Yeah the problem is the bridge being lit. Not sure how you get around that but an ND filter allows longer shutter speeds for wider apertures.


If I will be able to paint out the over exposed bridge in the star trails shots using layer masks I could just leave the shorter f8 exposure for the bridge, what bothers me is how much the brightness of the bridge on the longer exposures might bleed into the rest of the image meaning I have to paint out a lot of the star trails near the bridge. 

The f8 bridge shot I took did show some stars, but not many and I know there are a lot more up there if I can open my aperture and that way the trails will look more impressive. But I don't want to have to do too much experimenting at 10 minute exposures just because of the time it will take to decide on the right exposures.

As to filters, I only have grads and a polariser, I could use the polariser to slow things a bit but I don't think filters are going to solve the bright bridge issue.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 23, 2018)

What I am bothered about is having a halo of no trails around the edges of the light given off by the bridge. I suppose I could move the bridge shot a little to the right and up to hide the halo  Would that be cheating too much?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 23, 2018)

weltweit said:


> What I am bothered about is having a halo of no trails around the edges of the light given off by the bridge. I suppose I could move the bridge shot a little to the right and up to hide the halo  Would that be cheating too much?



If you’re already layering....


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 23, 2018)

You could do the star shot away from the bridge.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 23, 2018)

I wonder, is there a time with long exposures where you have collected all the light that you are going to collect? So if I look at a 5 minutes in, will there be more light at 10 minutes for a given set of settings?

I haven't said that very clearly.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 23, 2018)

Magnus McGinty said:


> You could do the star shot away from the bridge.


I do want to be as genuine as possible


----------



## Signal 11 (Jun 23, 2018)

weltweit said:


> I wonder, is there a time with long exposures where you have collected all the light that you are going to collect? So if I look at a 5 minutes in, will there be more light at 10 minutes for a given set of settings?


I haven't had a go at star trails with a digital camera yet, but I'd look at it like this...

As the stars are trailing, increasing the exposure time won't make them any brighter. But it will make the sky lighter. So to get the maximum number of stars I'd pick the shortest exposure that would give some trailing, maybe 2 or 3 times the exposure I'd use if I didn't want trailing (which would be about 500 divided by the effective focal length). Then set the aperture as wide as possible without losing sharpness. Then set the ISO as high as possible without washing out the background or getting too much noise.

I'd expect it to be something like 30-60 seconds and a pretty low ISO.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 23, 2018)

Hi Signal 11 I see what you are getting at with the shortest exposure with some movement and I agree that might be a solution. I have to weigh it against if it was 60s, having 60 images to blend afterwards, apart from the amount of megabytes, I want to blend in elements and 60 would be a lot of work. For ultimate image quality I see where you are coming from and I think you might be right it is just that there is a tradeoff involved.


----------



## Signal 11 (Jun 23, 2018)

weltweit I had a look to see what people have used for the same subject and it looks like you can get good results with either approach: this one used 3 minutes and this one used 30 seconds.

Also tried starstax using some I took at meteor watch that were not meant to be trailed. I just picked 10 that were pointed in the same direction, clicked the button and it gave me trails! I'll have to have a go at taking some proper ones.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 23, 2018)

Signal 11 said:


> weltweit I had a look to see what people have used for the same subject and it looks like you can get good results with either approach: this one used 3 minutes and this one used 30 seconds.


Fascinating, and they are two vantage points that I haven't yet found. 

My plan is to be much closer to the bridge which may be my undoing but I will give it a go. 


Signal 11 said:


> Also tried starstax using some I took at meteor watch that were not meant to be trailed. I just picked 10 that were pointed in the same direction, clicked the button and it gave me trails! I'll have to have a go at taking some proper ones.


I have heard of starstax might have to have a closer look. 

What I need is a cloudless night on a Friday or Saturday with hopefully no moon in shot. It does seem trails do seem more of a pain than straight milky way shots


----------



## weltweit (Jun 23, 2018)

Actually there could be another issue. 

Those two shots you linked to were taken looking into the SW and W. 
At my planned vantage point I will be looking SE.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 27, 2018)

Signal 11 I am all geared up to have a go this Friday night when there will be no clouds, but there will be a blooming moon, and it seems I will be pointed right at it .. GRRRR

Does anyone know how the moon moves during the night?


----------



## neonwilderness (Jun 27, 2018)

If you're still interested in shots of the Milky Way too, have a read of this page. It has a calculator to give the best settings for your kit.

Milky Way Exposure Calculator – Lonely Speck


----------



## weltweit (Jun 27, 2018)

neonwilderness said:


> If you're still interested in shots of the Milky Way too, have a read of this page. It has a calculator to give the best settings for your kit.
> 
> Milky Way Exposure Calculator – Lonely Speck


Hi neonwilderness, 

Yup still interested in that, thanks for the link, all info absorbed gratefully  

I may have to have a play with that Friday night as the star trails seems likely not to be on because of the moon.


----------



## Signal 11 (Jun 27, 2018)

weltweit said:


> Does anyone know how the moon moves during the night?


About 12 degrees per day, so you won't see it move much relative to the stars over an hour or two. Friday it will be rising just before 11pm.


----------



## Signal 11 (Jun 27, 2018)

weltweit said:


> I may have to have a play with that Friday night as the star trails seems likely not to be on because of the moon.


You really want no Moon for the Milky Way. May be worth having a trial run for either though so you'll be ready when you get the right conditions.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 27, 2018)

Signal 11 said:


> About 12 degrees per day, so you won't see it move much relative to the stars over an hour or two. Friday it will be rising just before 11pm.


When you say "rising" do you mean getting lit? 
And my understanding is that it will be in the east Friday?


----------



## weltweit (Jun 27, 2018)

Signal 11 said:


> You really want no Moon for the Milky Way. May be worth having a trial run for either though so you'll be ready when you get the right conditions.


It is frustrating, I don't know when we will next have a cloudless night.


----------



## Signal 11 (Jun 27, 2018)

weltweit rising above the horizon. screenshot atteched from Stellarium


----------



## pesh (Jun 28, 2018)

i had a go. its not very good.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 28, 2018)

Hi pesh well you got quite a few stars in that  what were your settings?


----------



## pesh (Jun 28, 2018)

I was quite drunk. I think it was 8 seconds and wide open, not sure of the ISO


----------



## RoyReed (Jun 29, 2018)

pesh said:


> I was quite drunk. I think it was 8 seconds and wide open, not sure of the ISO


It was Panasonic DMC-LX100, 11mm lens, 10secs @ f2, 400iso - just look in the EXIF data.


----------



## 8ball (Jun 29, 2018)

weltweit said:


> What are the considerations to take into account for achieving such an image?



Make sure you are in, or at least very close to the Milky Way to start with.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 30, 2018)

Still haven't done a milky way, but might have a go tonight. 

I did do a star trails though. What do you think?


----------



## Signal 11 (Jun 30, 2018)

That's really good weltweit.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 1, 2018)

Had a disappointing night. I wanted to photograph the milky way, how hard can it be I thought? There was an almost full moon which didn't help, then there was also a little ambient light.

I tried f2.8 ISO3200 and 20 seconds, which was recommended, very blown out and no sign of the milky way. Adjusting settings improved things. I was in the main pointing about south, in the end I started to get cold so I went home - but the milky way, it was just not there!

I learnt that my tripod will only point up so far, about 45 degrees max. And I can understand people using ultrawide lenses for this kind of photography. My 20mm on FF all of a sudden didn't feel so wide.


----------



## Signal 11 (Jul 2, 2018)

Yes, you need very good conditions for the Milky Way. Unless you've got at least a fairly good view of it visually it's not going to be worth shooting. You definitely want no Moon and shoot from the darkest site you can (light pollution map), ideally later in the year when we start getting proper dark nights again (this site is useful for that).


----------



## weltweit (Jul 2, 2018)

Signal 11 said:


> Yes, you need very good conditions for the Milky Way. Unless you've got at least a fairly good view of it visually it's not going to be worth shooting. You definitely want no Moon and shoot from the darkest site you can (light pollution map), ideally later in the year when we start getting proper dark nights again (this site is useful for that).


Hi Signal 11, thanks for the links, they look useful. So perhaps because of the moon and the ambient light it was there, I just couldn't see it?


----------



## RoyReed (Jul 2, 2018)

weltweit said:


> Hi Signal 11, thanks for the links, they look useful. So perhaps because of the moon and the ambient light it was there, I just couldn't see it?


It's always there, whether you can see it or not


----------



## weltweit (Jul 5, 2018)

Going to have another go this weekend at the milky way, there seems to be no moon Friday night and I am going to drive to a dark area. Not having been there before there is no guarantee I will be able to find any ground interest.

Not 100% certain I will get proper darkness though. Weather will apparently be light clouds which is ok because I only need 20 seconds.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 5, 2018)

weltweit said:


> Not 100% certain I will get proper darkness though. Weather will apparently be light clouds which is ok because I only need 20 seconds.


At this time of year you will never get ‘proper’ darkness in the UK. You never leave astronomical twilight all night. True darkness won’t return until 14 July at the earliest, or later (the further north you are).


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2018)

Second attempt was successful, I got my first milky way shot.  

That was 1 am and much too dark to be finding proper ground interest which will have to wait until another day. As mentioned my tripod does not point up enough so I shortened one leg to get more lift and then twisted the tripod plate round on the camera so that I could point up more. 

After I had been out for about half an hour I could really see the stars and what a view, I feel I should know more about which star is which, but the night sky was very special tonight, I could have happily stayed an hour or two more just looking at it. 

Despite the time of year, it got quite cold, this time I had warm clothing - but there also seemed to be a dew which wetted both me and the camera. 

I was quite surprised how fast the milky way was moving, in shots taken about a minute apart it moved perhaps 4 mm on my LCD screen. I thought about taking a sort of time lapse but I couldn't remember the instructions for getting the camera to do it and for manual exposures my cable release was in my other bag. I could have just used the shutter release in hindsight anyhow that is something for next time, which just might be tonight!


----------



## Signal 11 (Jul 7, 2018)

weltweit said:


> Second attempt was successful, I got my first milky way shot.


Well done, that's great!



weltweit said:


> After I had been out for about half an hour I could really see the stars and what a view, I feel I should know more about which star is which, but the night sky was very special tonight, I could have happily stayed an hour or two more just looking at it.


I've marked a few things on it. The "summer triangle" of Deneb, Vega and Altair tend to be the first ones you see as it starts to get dark at this time of year and a good way to get your bearings.
 

It's worth using something like Stellarium for planning and identifying what you captured, or one of those phone apps that shows you what it's pointed at.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2018)

Signal 11 said:


> Well done, that's great!


Thanks, quite pleased with myself  



Signal 11 said:


> I've marked a few things on it. The "summer triangle" of Deneb, Vega and Altair tend to be the first ones you see as it starts to get dark at this time of year and a good way to get your bearings.
> View attachment 140313


Thanks for that, very interesting and useful, I did have a bit of hunt to find it before my eyes had adjusted, I took pictures around where I thought south was and found it in shot 3. The camera could see it before I could. In fact I could only partly see it even after an hour outside. But there were some notably bright stars and I thought if I knew what they were I could have found south sooner. 

Mars (from your notes) was noticeably bright and low to the horizon. 



Signal 11 said:


> It's worth using something like Stellarium for planning and identifying what you captured, or one of those phone apps that shows you what it's pointed at.


Unfortunately I don't have a smart phone at the moment, so no aps for me :-( 

So Signal 11, you are very knowledgeable about the night sky, how is it that you know so much?


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2018)




----------



## Signal 11 (Jul 7, 2018)

weltweit said:


> So Signal 11, you are very knowledgeable about the night sky, how is it that you know so much?


Thanks. There are some here who know a lot more than me. I've been interested since I was very young, but haven't studied it properly. I go to a local group where we have lectures once a month and observing evenings. There's a list of groups here.


----------



## RoyReed (Jul 7, 2018)

weltweit said:


> Second attempt was successful, I got my first milky way shot. View attachment 140278
> 
> That was 1 am and much too dark to be finding proper ground interest which will have to wait until another day. As mentioned my tripod does not point up enough so I shortened one leg to get more lift and then twisted the tripod plate round on the camera so that I could point up more.
> 
> ...


Really nice shot!


----------



## weltweit (Jul 7, 2018)

Signal 11 said:


> Thanks. There are some here who know a lot more than me. I've been interested since I was very young, but haven't studied it properly. I go to a local group where we have lectures once a month and observing evenings. There's a list of groups here.


Interesting page, thanks for the link. There are two in my area. There may be some that know more here than you but they have not been as helpful to a beginner like me as you have!! 

I recently read the Jack Aubrey and Stephen Maturin series (Master and Commander) by Patrick O'Brien. They would regularly take navigational readings from the stars on the open oceans. Like now, I realised how little I know about the night sky. 

Last night I drove to near Sennybridge which your dark skies website told me should be relatively free from light pollution, it was very striking just how many stars were visible. Quite beautiful the night sky. 

Blimey England 2 Sweden 0


----------



## weltweit (Jul 10, 2018)

Now I want a milky way with some interesting ground object, there are some chapels and castles around here which might make interesting shapes but they aren't in wholly dark sky areas. I will have my son down shortly so perhaps I can persuade him to pose. 

Some photographers seem to take two exposures, one low ISO long exposure for the ground object followed by a shorter high ISO exposure for the milky way and then they combine the two in photoshop. I am not that expert at photoshop so would prefer not to have to do this. 

I am also thinking of light painting the object if it is small enough or my torch is bright enough, perhaps I could use flash .. 

What do you think?


----------



## RoyReed (Jul 10, 2018)

weltweit said:


> Now I want a milky way with some interesting ground object, there are some chapels and castles around here which might make interesting shapes but they aren't in wholly dark sky areas. I will have my son down shortly so perhaps I can persuade him to pose.
> 
> Some photographers seem to take two exposures, one low ISO long exposure for the ground object followed by a shorter high ISO exposure for the milky way and then they combine the two in photoshop. I am not that expert at photoshop so would prefer not to have to do this.
> 
> ...


If you've got a flash you can use off-camera, that's what I'd do. Set it on very low power (maybe 1/16 or 1/32) and set it off by hand during the long camera exposure. You'll need to experiment a bit.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 10, 2018)

RoyReed said:


> If you've got a flash you can use off-camera, that's what I'd do. Set it on very low power (maybe 1/16 or 1/32) and set it off by hand during the long camera exposure. You'll need to experiment a bit.


Aha, yes I have a Sunpak flash that could do that. Do you think that might be enough to light something big like a chapel? As to experimenting yes I agree and at least these will be only 25s exposures, when I did that star trails one I was committed for an hour!


----------



## RoyReed (Jul 10, 2018)

weltweit said:


> Aha, yes I have a Sunpak flash that could do that. Do you think that might be enough to light something big like a chapel?


Yes, with more than one flash.


----------



## RoyReed (Jul 11, 2018)

If you do try to use this technique wear dark/black clothes and you're less likely to register in the shot as you walk through frame.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 11, 2018)

RoyReed said:


> If you do try to use this technique wear dark/black clothes and you're less likely to register in the shot as you walk through frame.


Good point. I am definitely going to give it a try, I have done some light painting with my flash before so I have an idea … but tips are always welcome. 

At the moment I am wondering if the castles and chapels I am thinking about are in dark enough areas to also give me a good milky way. The night sky where I went for that first image was so vivid and stunning I am not sure about more lit areas. Then there is the moon, I am just looking into its predictions at the moment.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 16, 2018)

I went back to the same location as the first shots on Saturday. I found the milky way in the same part of the sky but it was not as impressive. Same settings, no moon or clouds. I don't yet understand why sometimes it is more impressive than others. 

Here for example is a shot taken by Matt Pinner at Durdle Door on the Dorset coast:

My images are just very underwhelming compared to that.

Sunday I went to an old castle, hoping for some ground interest and the milky way. Sadly there were too many clouds which I could have predicted when I left but I was hopeful for a break. Light painting a tower of the castle worked ok with my flash on its lowest settings - if a little interesting because of the bright white light of the flash.

I don't know when the next opportunity will be, the moon is coming back in the coming week, although I don't know in which part of the sky it will be but anyhow the weather is saying cloudy every day.


----------



## RoyReed (Jul 16, 2018)

weltweit said:


> I don't know when the next opportunity will be, the moon is coming back in the coming week, although I don't know in which part of the sky it will be but anyhow the weather is saying cloudy every day.


You can always tell exactly where the sun or moon will be relative to the landscape.

Photographers Ephemeris

I think I already linked to this up thread. You can either use the website, or d/l the app.

So easy these days. When I used to work full time as an architectural photographer I had to use OS maps and astronomical tables.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 16, 2018)

Aha, RoyReed good point thanks, I need to have a play with that. Can't download an app because I don't have a smart phone but the web app should be helpful.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 16, 2018)

Your patience paid off. That is a quality result for second attempt.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 16, 2018)

Stanley Edwards said:


> Your patience paid off. That is a quality result for second attempt.


Thanks Stan, although in attempt #3 & #4 I was not able to repeat it. 

I gather some photographers are taking 3-4 images then combining them - lining them up - in photoshop which seems to give more of an effect.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 16, 2018)

weltweit said:


> Thanks Stan, although in attempt #3 & #4 I was not able to repeat it.



Personally I think PS is crossing the line from photography to digital imaging once you go beyond basic levels. Photography for me is about recording a reality and presenting it as a visual document, or archive.

As wrong as this might sound, I would try using a polarizing filter and stopping down to the smallest aperture as a starting point. Then, compromising the exposure time. Sounds like making a difficult job even harder, but there is logic in my madness.

A smaller aperture will increase contrast and give a sharper image. Less refraction going on in the lens elements and you are using the very best part of your glass only. Polarizing will also dramatically increase contrast. It might be too dark to your eyes, but the camera doesn't know this - the light, water vapour and pollution is still there to be filtered out.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 17, 2018)

Stanley Edwards said:


> Personally I think PS is crossing the line from photography to digital imaging once you go beyond basic levels. Photography for me is about recording a reality and presenting it as a visual document, or archive.
> 
> As wrong as this might sound, I would try using a polarizing filter and stopping down to the smallest aperture as a starting point. Then, compromising the exposure time. Sounds like making a difficult job even harder, but there is logic in my madness.
> 
> A smaller aperture will increase contrast and give a sharper image. Less refraction going on in the lens elements and you are using the very best part of your glass only. Polarizing will also dramatically increase contrast. It might be too dark to your eyes, but the camera doesn't know this - the light, water vapour and pollution is still there to be filtered out.


I don't know Stan, I see what you are saying about contrast and such but will it not increase my shutter speed massively to capture the faint light? and it is all moving up there, I have been told that 25s on a 20mm lens is about as slow as I can go to avoid the stars turning into streaks.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 17, 2018)

Matt Pinner wrote that he recommends ISO3200 - 6400 which might be something for me to vary.. So far I haven't been above ISO3200.


----------



## Signal 11 (Jul 17, 2018)

Stanley Edwards said:


> As wrong as this might sound, I would try using a polarizing filter and stopping down to the smallest aperture as a starting point.


If it's still too easy after that you could try adding a solar filter too.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 17, 2018)

weltweit said:


> ...and it is all moving up there, I have been told that 25s ....



Of course there is a lot of movement going on up there. Every star is a sun! However, I doubt if any camera our money could buy would be capable of recording that movement. Think about it.

You have 30 Seconds to play with. At 6400 ISO that is a lot of Stops. My time would be spent experimenting before taking the experts word for granted. Everyone assumes a wide aperture is better. I suspect something around f11 would get the best results.

Cameras do not have the cognitive stuff going on we have going on in our visual cortex. Time is the only limiting parameter here.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 17, 2018)

I am going to have a try at iso6400 next opportunity I get because the milky way is very faint and it could brighten my exposure of it. I don't know how much noise it will produce but it will be more than at iso3200.


----------



## Signal 11 (Jul 17, 2018)

Stanley Edwards said:


> My time would be spent experimenting before taking the experts word for granted.


You should do your experimenting _before_ telling us that all the people who are getting good results are doing it all wrong.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 17, 2018)

I added a compass to my camera bag today, so no more wondering which way is south


----------



## weltweit (Jul 24, 2018)

The issue of my computer and software raised its head tonight. I tried to transform, align and merge 3 x 36mpx images of the milky way in elements 9 and it almost crashed my machine. Since I got my D800 my kit has so far seemed to do everything I asked of it but it seems there are limits after all.

In the end I did manage to achieve it but the result was underwhelming.


----------



## Signal 11 (Jul 25, 2018)

weltweit you'll need a lot more than 3 frames to get much benefit from stacking and you'll want something like DeepSkyStacker to stack them automatically. They have a page here with an explanation and examples of the effects of stacking. Basically it reduces the noise with the square root of the number of frames, so you can get away with a higher iso and stretch it more in post processing.

It's best to shoot in raw mode and turn off any in camera processing if you're going to stack them.


----------



## RoyReed (Jul 25, 2018)

Here's one for you from the Astronomy Photographer of the Year shortlist.







And a couple more that were shown on DPR.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 25, 2018)

Signal 11 said:


> weltweit you'll need a lot more than 3 frames to get much benefit from stacking and you'll want something like DeepSkyStacker to stack them automatically. They have a page here with an explanation and examples of the effects of stacking. Basically it reduces the noise with the square root of the number of frames, so you can get away with a higher iso and stretch it more in post processing.
> 
> It's best to shoot in raw mode and turn off any in camera processing if you're going to stack them.


Hi Signal 11,
I didn't realise DeepSkyStacker was free! that makes it much more interesting 

I will take a look and see how many frames it recommends, but in my limited experience the MW seems to move quite fast across the frame so I am unlikely to get more than perhaps 6 before it is largely gone. 
eta: or can I move the camera?

And I am shooting raw with no NR of whatever on ..


----------



## weltweit (Jul 26, 2018)

RoyReed said:


> Here's one for you from the Astronomy Photographer of the Year shortlist.
> 
> And a couple more that were shown on DPR.


I really like this one but there is a massive halo around the rock which makes me think it is probably a composite image.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 10, 2018)

Frustratingly tonight suddenly might be the last chance for a while (there is almost a new moon and in the last couple of hours the sky has become cloudless) the season for milky way shots is coming to an end, but I can't go out tonight


----------



## weltweit (Nov 16, 2018)

Am I right in thinking this time of year the milky way has largely fallen below the horizon in the northern hemisphere, making photographing it less worthwhile?


----------



## 2hats (Nov 16, 2018)

No. Visible right across the sky E to W through the zenith this very minute in the UK (indicated by the thin white arc - the galactic equator):

Well, if it were clear.


----------



## weltweit (Nov 16, 2018)

Hi 2hats don't know where I picked that up then, I was sure I was told that it was between May and September the best views were available. 

Great if not, I am off to Brecon soon where there is little light pollution. 

I don't understand your graphic, what does it mean?


----------



## 2hats (Nov 16, 2018)

weltweit said:


> Hi 2hats don't know where I picked that up then, I was sure I was told that it was between May and September the best views were available.
> 
> Great if not, I am off to Brecon soon where there is little light pollution.


Some part of the Milky Way can always be seen from the UK, it’s just that the more rich areas accessible to northern hemisphere dwellers are visible in the summer. The portion in the northern winter skies is more dim, a little less exciting. Maybe that just makes for more of a challenge to photograph though.


> I don't understand your graphic, what does it mean?


The white arc through the centre from west to east is the path of the Milky Way ie the plane of the galactic equator projected on our sky (it’s a sky map for now, tonight).


----------



## weltweit (Nov 16, 2018)

2hats said:


> Some part of the Milky Way can always be seen from the UK, it’s just that the more rich areas accessible to northern hemisphere dwellers are visible in the summer. The portion in the northern winter skies is more dim, a little less exciting. Maybe that just makes for more of a challenge to photograph though.


Hmm. I don't have any complex kit, so it is one or more single shots for me. I might be able to blend a series of photos, I believe there is free software available for that. 

I have seen that the best photos of it seem to be blends of many images, also with a rotating camera mount. 


2hats said:


> The white arc through the centre from west to east is the path of the Milky Way ie the plane of the galactic equator projected on our sky (it’s a sky map for now, tonight).


I noticed north is at the bottom. Confused me a little.


----------



## weltweit (Nov 16, 2018)

2hats Will the MW still be in the southern part of the sky this time of year?

Because even with 30 minutes getting used to the dark I couldn't see it with the naked eye last time I was out. My camera could see it fine once I had worked out which bit of the sky to point it at, but I couldn't see it on my own.


----------



## Signal 11 (Nov 16, 2018)

weltweit said:


> I noticed north is at the bottom. Confused me a little.


It helps to imagine those diagrams on the inside of an umbrella so the direction labels go all around the horizon.



weltweit said:


> Will the MW still be in the southern part of the sky this time of year?


Cygnus, which was in the image you posted before is close to the horizon in the NW now. And on the opposite side the MW is near Orion in the SE.

this is worth a read on the winter milky way.

Orion is always a good subject at this time of year. It's a good time for star trails too with the long nights. And you could have a go at capturing some meteors with the Leonids about now and the Geminids in the middle of December.


----------



## weltweit (Nov 17, 2018)

Signal 11 said:


> It helps to imagine those diagrams on the inside of an umbrella so the direction labels go all around the horizon.


Can't seem to get my head around it  



Signal 11 said:


> Cygnus, which was in the image you posted before is close to the horizon in the NW now. And on the opposite side the MW is near Orion in the SE.
> 
> this is worth a read on the winter milky way.


Great article, thanks for the link. Most interesting, I am going to be in Brecon in the new year, I hope for a clear night. 



Signal 11 said:


> Orion is always a good subject at this time of year. It's a good time for star trails too with the long nights. And you could have a go at capturing some meteors with the Leonids about now and the Geminids in the middle of December.


Thanks. I do plan a circular star trail at some point, perhaps an hour with the shutter open if I can figure out decent settings. Or I could do shorter exposures and blend them I don't yet know which will be the best option.


----------



## Signal 11 (Nov 17, 2018)

weltweit said:


> I do plan a circular star trail at some point, perhaps an hour with the shutter open if I can figure out decent settings. Or I could do shorter exposures and blend them I don't yet know which will be the best option.


I'd always use shorter ones and stack them. That way you can do some quick test shots to make sure you're getting what you want first. And I'd be surprised if you could go anywhere near an hour in one exposure with a dslr.


----------



## weltweit (Nov 17, 2018)

Signal 11 said:


> I'd always use shorter ones and stack them. That way you can do some quick test shots to make sure you're getting what you want first. And I'd be surprised if you could go anywhere near an hour in one exposure with a dslr.


Aha, why do you say not an hour with a dslr?

Anyhow as you say shorter gives me a chance to check things are working out, you are probably right that is a better idea.


----------



## RoyReed (Nov 17, 2018)

weltweit said:


> Aha, why do you say not an hour with a DSLR?


The longer the exposure, the hotter the sensor will get. This will generate more noise. If it gets too hot the camera will shut down. There will also be significant battery drain. Will there be enough power for a one hour exposure.

If you're happy with that, you might want to take some extra precautions while you're taking the photo.

Cover the viewfinder - any extraneous light that's around can leak in here and spoil the shot.

Tape the focus and zoom rings on the lens - changes in temperature can cause them to creep, particularly if the camera is pointing upwards.

Hang a weight under the centre column of the tripod to help prevent vibration.

Changes in temperature can cause the tripod to move. Make sure it's adjusted to ambient levels before you take the shot (not straight out of the inside of a warm car). Same for the camera/lens to prevent condensation.


----------



## weltweit (Nov 17, 2018)

RoyReed said:


> The longer the exposure, the hotter the sensor will get. This will generate more noise. If it gets too hot the camera will shut down. There will also be significant battery drain. Will there be enough power for a one hour exposure.


I think I will take shorter exposures, apart from anything I don't want to have to wait for an hour to see if what I am getting is rubbish  



RoyReed said:


> If you're happy with that, you might want to take some extra precautions while you're taking the photo.
> 
> Cover the viewfinder - any extraneous light that's around can leak in here and spoil the shot.


Yes I can do that, there is a little knob that moves a cover over the viewfinder.



RoyReed said:


> Tape the focus and zoom rings on the lens - changes in temperature can cause them to creep, particularly if the camera is pointing upwards.


I am probably going to use my 20mm prime so no zoom ring to worry about. 



RoyReed said:


> Hang a weight under the centre column of the tripod to help prevent vibration.


My last camera bag had a small loop at the top which I could attach to a knob on my tripod, my present bag doesn't have one. I may see if I can modify my tripod a little .. 



RoyReed said:


> Changes in temperature can cause the tripod to move. Make sure it's adjusted to ambient levels before you take the shot (not straight out of the inside of a warm car). Same for the camera/lens to prevent condensation.


Yes, aha, good point. I had a condensation issue going into a hothouse at a butterfly farm, it was quite a pain and the condensation took ages to clear. During my last milky way expedition everything was going well but at about 1am there seemed to be a dew which settled over and wetted us including onto the lens. I didn't have anything to wipe it with so I just continued and luckily it didn't seem to affect things too much.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 29, 2018)

Hoping for clear skies next weekend.


----------



## gosub (Aug 5, 2019)




----------



## weltweit (Jun 18, 2020)

What with the lockdown relaxing, I may have another go at milky way photos. Someone told me recently that my upthread attempts were good but that light pollution had taken detail out of the MW which would have been present if I had been in a darker area. 

I thought the Brecon Beacons were a pretty low light pollution area but there is the glow from habitation in the images, so I do need proper dark next time. 

It means I can get a decent display of the MW in a single shot, without having to buy one of these startracker devices, which I really don't want to buy. 

It has got me thinking about the west or south coasts. Looking south i.e. out to sea surely there shouldn't be any light sources to muck up my MW image? 

I also need a foreground interest, I am struggling with this, perhaps Worms Head by Llangenith?

So much to think about: south facing, no moon, no clouds, no light pollution, foreground interest. Grr


----------



## weltweit (Jun 18, 2020)

I know it is possible to shoot the MW over Durdle Door because I have seen photographs from there (and linked to them earlier in this thread) and it does look good but it is a long drive for me especially as there are no guarantees of good conditions.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 18, 2020)

weltweit said:


> It has got me thinking about the west or south coasts. Looking south i.e. out to sea surely there shouldn't be any light sources to muck up my MW image?


On family summer holidays decades ago I used to sit up all night on the top deck of cross channel ferry crossings so I could enjoy the extra dark skies. Especially when coincident with the Perseids.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 19, 2020)

2hats said:


> On family summer holidays decades ago I used to sit up all night on the top deck of cross channel ferry crossings so I could enjoy the extra dark skies. Especially when coincident with the Perseids.


Aha, yes - during my last nocturnal exploit I was stunned by the sight of the stars when my eyes had become accustomed, it was like looking at a secret but special and most beautiful scene, which only exclusive people who were out at 1am would ever see.  

So 2hats a sea view might work for the MW?


----------



## 2hats (Jun 19, 2020)

weltweit said:


> So 2hats a sea view might work for the MW?


The further you can get away from artificial light, the better.


----------



## editor (Jun 19, 2020)

Apparently the Olympus OM-D cameras can do a brilliant job of photographing the stars 











						You Can Shoot the Milky Way Hand-Held with the Olympus E-M1 Mark II
					

When it comes to optical image stabilization, it seems like nothing comes close to touching Olympus' OM-D E-M1 Mark II. As one photographer recently




					petapixel.com


----------



## weltweit (Jun 19, 2020)

That is all very well editor but I don't have an Olympus, I have a Nikon


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 19, 2020)

My first thought was that you were shooting a porn video. Lockdown is affecting me more than I realised.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 19, 2020)

weltweit said:


> What with the lockdown relaxing, I may have another go at milky way photos. Someone told me recently that my upthread attempts were good but that light pollution had taken detail out of the MW which would have been present if I had been in a darker area.
> 
> I thought the Brecon Beacons were a pretty low light pollution area but there is the glow from habitation in the images, so I do need proper dark next time.
> 
> ...



My Mrs comes from Islay (pop circa 4000). Last year I went over to Jura (pop 188) and camped for a night. 

The memory of a large spliff, Floyd 'Wish you were here'album playing, and lying back looking up at the stars will be with me for ever. Here in Livingston (pop circa 55,000) on a clear Winter's night, you can just see the brightest part of the Milky Way.

I had planned a few nights of wild camping this year, but the fucking plague has put paid to that.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 3, 2020)

Sasaferrato said:


> ..
> I had planned a few nights of wild camping this year, but the fucking plague has put paid to that.


Surely being in the middle of nowhere without any other people should be ok at the moment?


----------



## weltweit (Jul 3, 2020)

Having a think about the milky way (MW). If I set up at 1am and find the MW lying down rather than standing up, it will take 6 hours for the earth to rotate 90 degrees such that the MW is then standing up. I probably won't have enough hours of darkness in summertime to wait that long. 

I suppose because of all the factors needing to be right for a MW picture I will just have to take what I can get at the time, rather than limiting myself even further by yet more conditions.


----------



## Saunders (Jul 3, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Surely being in the middle of nowhere without any other people should be ok at the moment?


Not in this weather!


----------



## weltweit (Jul 3, 2020)

I have been looking at some star trails pictures recently, aimed broadly at the north star combined shutter open times of perhaps 2 hours. (there is an example in the Oly video up thread). I have seen people shooting wide open with exposure times of 20-30 seconds and ISO 3200 to get strong star registration. 

For a MW shot I just need 20 - 30 seconds but for a circular star trails shot I need about 2 hours cloud, moon and ambient light free. Also, for a MW picture I will be pointing to the south while for a circular star trail image I will be pointing to the north. Just trying to get things sorted out in my mind.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 3, 2020)

Saunders said:


> Not in this weather!


how do you mean?


----------



## Saunders (Jul 3, 2020)

weltweit said:


> how do you mean?


Just a silly reply. I’m just right now in a middle of nowhere place, with barely anyone around,  where the Milky Way is very visible if theres no cloud cover. And it’s pissing down. Sorry. Just a throwaway remark. I like this thread and I hope you get your photos.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 8, 2020)

You might want to have a look for Comet NEOWISE (C/2020 F3) right now.


----------



## weltweit (Jul 8, 2020)

2hats said:


> You might want to have a look for Comet NEOWISE (C/2020 F3) right now.


I have seen some photos of it online. 
Don't know how I would go about getting some though. 
Probably could find out online though.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2020)

I am now on holiday until Monday 17th August and wondering if I can do some Milky Way photography one of these nights. 

So I am going to look for moon condition and position, if I might get a night that is clear of clouds, and if I can find somewhere on the coast giving me something towards the south.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2020)

Weather: partial moon and clear skies for me where I am on Saturday and Sunday. Rest of week not so good.

I will be away Sunday.

Rhossili (for example) Sat night good clear from cloud and Thursday night but partial moon.

Moon 11 August half moon. Next new moon on 19th August.

Moon position in sky - apparently the moon rises in the NE .. which should be ok as the MW is in the South. Can that be right? does it change over time? I suppose it must.

For the sake of looking, the tides for The Mumbles on Thursday - are High Tide at 1am, moon last quarter. I would prefer low tide as it gives me more space to get a position.

Thursday is looking interesting, I will have my son with me then. Saturday (tomorrow) isn't ideal.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2020)

Great discussion on Welsh Covid-19 restrictions at the moment? about locations and restrictions in Wales. 

But I think I will also wonder about Durdle Door in Dorset. 
Google Maps says 2.5 hours drive from home. - I think that is a no for Durdle Door. 

Oxwich Bay is just 1 hour 40 minutes away


----------



## planetgeli (Aug 7, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Great discussion on Welsh Covid-19 restrictions at the moment? about locations and restrictions in Wales.
> 
> But I think I will also wonder about Durdle Door in Dorset.
> Google Maps says 2.5 hours drive from home. - I think that is a no for Durdle Door.
> ...



Be warned, that last half hour to Oxwich Bay is down a thousand narrow lanes. Doesn't make it impossible but it's slow driving. And Oxwich Bay gets busy, though not late in the evening.

Edit, actually they aren't that narrow. If you want narrow, drive from Oxwich across the Gower. That's a ridiculous drive,


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2020)

planetgeli said:


> ..
> Edit, actually they aren't that narrow. If you want narrow, drive from Oxwich across the Gower. That's a ridiculous drive,


Yes I have been caught in the Gower a few times, and I am wary about parking there also.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2020)

Need to get some batteries for my head torch. 

Wish I had an idea where to get some red cellophane.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2020)

Oxwich Bay is interesting, however 24 miles due south is Ilfracombe.
And it is due south that I will be photographing.
Will that cause light pollution for me?


----------



## clicker (Aug 7, 2020)

You might catch the perseids too.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2020)

clicker said:


> You might catch the perseids too.


clicker I don't know anything about them, can you expand a bit please?


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2020)

Thinking about settings, I think I am going to boost my ISO way up this time, it seems the secret to gathering more detail in the Milky Way in a single shot. Hopefully if I am lucky I may have time to experiment.

My last settings, from July 2018 (was it really so long ago?) were ISO3200 f2.8 FL 20mm and 25s.


----------



## clicker (Aug 7, 2020)

weltweit said:


> clicker I don't know anything about them, can you expand a bit please?











						Perseid meteor shower to dazzle skywatchers as it climbs towards peak
					

The most famous meteor shower of the year will be visible this weekend




					metro.co.uk
				




Meteor showers in August. I've always had success looking for them in a dark sky , am currently stuck in London so not much chance this year.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2020)

clicker cool, thanks for the informative link.


----------



## clicker (Aug 7, 2020)

weltweit said:


> clicker cool, thanks for the informative link.











						You could see 100 meteors an hour zoom by next week: Here’s how to watch the Perseids
					

The best way to watch the Perseids is to head out to a place with little light pollution as late as possible




					en.protothema.gr
				



No problem


----------



## weltweit (Aug 8, 2020)

Well the first part of my predictions seems ok, tonight it is clear of clouds here although someone told me that I am wrong about the moon rising in the NE, apparently it doesn't move around rather rises in the same place all the time.

According to a website I was just on it rises in the East.


----------



## RoyReed (Aug 9, 2020)

Photographer's ephemeris will show you where the moon rises for any location.









						Photo Ephemeris
					

Photo Ephemeris helps you plan outdoor photography in natural light. See how the light will fall on the land, day or night, for any location on earth.




					www.photoephemeris.com


----------



## weltweit (Aug 9, 2020)

RoyReed said:


> Photographer's ephemeris will show you where the moon rises for any location.
> ..


Right, I have downloaded it  (Finally!)


----------



## weltweit (Aug 9, 2020)

According to TPE moon will rise in the east. That will be fine.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 9, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Oxwich Bay is interesting, however 24 miles due south is Ilfracombe.
> And it is due south that I will be photographing.
> Will that cause light pollution for me?


And further due south is Plymouth. Grr


----------



## weltweit (Aug 10, 2020)

I have come to the conclusion that Rhossili is better than Oxwich bay because I have a nice sunset out to sea and if I'm near Llangennith I will have some ground interest in the worm's head to my south.

The only thing is the only night on which the sky is predicted to be clear is tonight and I am in Camberley so perhaps tonight isn't going to work. I just hope the weather forecast changes for coming days.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 11, 2020)

Had to forget about sunset as we were too late but I did go to the Gower for a MW attempt. I aimed for Llangenith with a view towards getting on the beach, the first route lead us to a security gate for a large caravan park / campsite. The next road westwards towards Hillend also ended up at a campsite with official looking gates. I gave up on the idea of getting on the beach and headed for Rhossili.

My Met office weather forecast was spot on, clear skies from about 11pm through, and TPE's prediction about the location of the moon, off to the east was also right. Also as predicted it was high tide while I was there. And my compass allowed me to focus on the MW immediately. So all that preparation worked. Stupidly we didn't have any decent torches though which being as it was midnight was an oversight!

The trouble with ending up on Rhossili is that the photogenic bits were all north of me and we didn't fancy the path down to the beach with a phone light between us. So after all that driving I was reduced to walking around the almost empty car park looking for items that might give foreground interest.



FL20mm @f2.8 25s ISO6400

Next time I attempt the Gower for MW I am definitely going to try to get there before Sunset and get on that beach, bring a decent torch and fix my tripod which caused me some grief last night.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 11, 2020)




----------



## weltweit (Aug 11, 2020)

I found a better white balance, based on the UPVC windows in the house.


----------



## RoyReed (Aug 13, 2020)




----------



## weltweit (Aug 13, 2020)

RoyReed said:


>



Hi RoyReed, thanks for that, it is a gorgeous picture. I would love to know their settings for the MW as they have a lot more detail than I have managed so far. (they don't include EXIF).


----------



## weltweit (Aug 13, 2020)

Actually if I get a bit more emphatic with the processing I can make more of my MW.



I think I need to work on my processing more. And find better ground interest.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 15, 2020)

I have been pointed at a site for milky way photography and am doing lots of reading. It turns out there are much more suitable lenses and better ways to post process. It is a massive site.

Anyhow I am pleased to be pointed at better ways as my own experiments are not really taking me forwards at the moment.


----------



## RoyReed (Aug 15, 2020)

weltweit said:


> I have been pointed at a site for milky way photography and am doing lots of reading. It turns out there are much more suitable lenses and better ways to post process. It is a massive site.
> 
> Anyhow I am pleased to be pointed at better ways as my own experiments are not really taking me forwards at the moment.


Link?


----------



## weltweit (Aug 15, 2020)

RoyReed said:


> Link?







__





						Astrophotography Image Processing 2, Clarkvision.com
					





					clarkvision.com


----------



## weltweit (Aug 16, 2020)

RoyReed let me know what you think of the link. I am mainly going by the fact that his images are very impressive in my decision that he knows what he is doing, I would be interested in a second opinion.


----------



## RoyReed (Aug 16, 2020)

He obviously knows what he's talking about, but I really didn't have time to do any more than skim read that one long article. I had a quick flick through a couple of others, and I think to get the best out of his website, you'd have to read through the majority of the 40 odd articles, filtering out a lot of the obsessive technical detail.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 22, 2020)

His position is that lenses can be graded by their light gathering capabilities according to their aperture area and that light gathering capabilities are king for astro-photography.

e.g. my 20mm f2.8, which I had thought ideal for milky way photography is 20/2.8 = 7.14

While my 50mm f1.8 is 50/1.8 = 27.77 so has a much greater capability for light gathering.
And I could get a 50mm f1.4 for not so much money 50/1.4 = 35.71

And my 85mm f1.4 is 85/1.4 = 60.71 significantly greater again.

85mm is a little long for the type of photography I have been attempting but I could probably construct a photo at 50mm. Alternatively there are 35mm f1.4 lenses I believe (35/1.4 = 25) though they seem quite pricey even used.

The take away from that part of his website is my 20mm f2.8 isn't ideal for milky way photos.





__





						Characteristics of Best cameras and lenses for nightscape and astro photography, Clarkvision.com
					





					clarkvision.com


----------



## Supine (Aug 22, 2020)

Impressed with what you have so far. Better than I expected! I don't think I've ever managed a decent shot of stars.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 22, 2020)

Supine said:


> Impressed with what you have so far. Better than I expected! I don't think I've ever managed a decent shot of stars.


Thanks Supine, I have definitely made progress from where I started, but now I see that there is some way to go, and great potential if I can understand what to do.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 23, 2020)

Some used lens options from mpb

My own 20mm f2.8 is 20/2.8=7.14

Nikon AF-S 20mm f/1.8G ED 20/1.8=11.11 £544.00
Nikon AF-S 24mm f/1.4G ED 24/1.4=17.14 £739.00
Nikon AF-S 28mm f/1.8G 28/1.8=15.55 £339.00
Nikon AF 35mm f/2D 35/2=17.5 £194
Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4G 35/1.4=25 £749.00
Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8G ED 35/1.8=19.44 £299.00
Nikon AF 50mm f/1.4 50/1.4=35.71 £94.00
Nikon AF 50mm f/1.4D 50/1.4=35.71 £174.00

There is no point in the 20 and the G series lenses are all expensive, the 35 f2 D for £194 looks interesting, with more than twice the light gathering of my 20mm.


----------

