Official Photography Thread

[tooblue]

tooblue’s night shots inspired my wife to try shooting the night sky this past week up at Kings Canyon and Sequoia National Parks. Despite some smoky haze, she did well. She enjoyed it so much we’ll spend the next new moon at Bryce and Zion NPs.

[ATTACH]10445[/ATTACH]

Great shot!

[tooblue]

Milky way pics from my canoe trip with my boys this past week (posted pics of the trip in the backpacking thread)

[swampfrog]

Got one clear night at the Oregon Coast. There was some light pollution from something, but since it silhouetted the tree, I decided I liked it. Probably should have tried a few other spots, but was lazy. Still need to get out in rural areas with some varied foreground.

[PaloAltoCougar]

I like the night shots, tb and sf, including the prominence of Ares. While Mrs. PAC was making her first attempt at night sky photography, I annoyed her with my limited knowledge of astronomy, including the fact that (i) only a few thousand stars are visible to the unaided human eye; (ii) unaided, we can't see any individual stars outside of our own galaxy; (iii) the Milky Way has somewhere between 150 billion and 400 billion stars (weird that we can't narrow it down more than that); and (iv) there are at least two trillion galaxies in the observable universe. Kind of drives home the "worlds without number" line in the POGP.

[Pelado]

I like the night shots, tb and sf, including the prominence of Ares. While Mrs. PAC was making her first attempt at night sky photography, I annoyed her with my limited knowledge of astronomy, including the fact that (i) only a few thousand stars are visible to the unaided human eye; (ii) unaided, we can't see any individual stars outside of our own galaxy; (iii) the Milky Way has somewhere between 150 billion and 400 billion stars (weird that we can't narrow it down more than that); and (iv) there are at least two trillion galaxies in the observable universe. Kind of drives home the "worlds without number" line in [strile]the POGP[/strike] most of clack's posts.

Fify

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[swampfrog]

Different processing. Slight color adjustment. Having not processed Milky Way shots before, they can be challenging. Easy to overdue color/contrast, but the out-of-camera images are pretty bland without some editing.

[swampfrog]

And one more. So many variables at play here. Using long exposures to capture information that the human eye cannot perceive creates a unique situation. No reality to compare.

This is more blue/magenta processing, with an overall lighter sky.

[mtnbiker]

And one more. So many variables at play here. Using long exposures to capture information that the human eye cannot perceive creates a unique situation. No reality to compare.

This is more blue/magenta processing, with an overall lighter sky.

Those long-exposure night skies are so cool. It's interesting that with just a 15-second exposure time the stars are blurred by the earth's rotation. They're all slightly enlongated from upper-left to lower-right. Unless that's some artifact of your shutter or touching the camera.

[All-American]

Those long-exposure night skies are so cool. It's interesting that with just a 15-second exposure time the stars are blurred by the earth's rotation. They're all slightly enlongated from upper-left to lower-right. Unless that's some artifact of your shutter or touching the camera.

It really doesn't take long. I broke out my telescope the other night to check out Jupiter and Saturn, which are really close to one another in the sky right now and are spectacular in even a little scope. You have to adjust it every minute or so because they will move out of view. If I ever get into photography with a scope I may have to buy a motor to offset the rotation. Or just get a nicer scope.

[swampfrog]

Those long-exposure night skies are so cool. It's interesting that with just a 15-second exposure time the stars are blurred by the earth's rotation. They're all slightly enlongated from upper-left to lower-right. Unless that's some artifact of your shutter or touching the camera.

Yes, that's what it is. If you closely inspect, you see the star trails, but generally not noticeable. Depending on the focal length and sensor size/pixel density, the shutter speed should be altered accordingly to minimize the effect. At least that's what my recent reading showed. I even found somebody's spread sheet of recommended times:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...CJ0/edit#gid=2

The lens I used is on row 39, recommended shutter speed max of 21 seconds for APS-C camera (7D mk II). I tried some with 20 seconds, some at 15, having to raise the ISO for faster speeds. I was using my tablet connected via wireless to shoot, so no mirror slap, and the shutter effect would be negligible (if existing at all) on the front and back of a 15+ second exposure. Focusing is a pain.

I had always wondered why people were always shooting the sky at high ISO with as large an aperture as they could get their hands on. Now I know, it's the star trails effect.

The results are not as good as the stacked process can have, where dozens of images are taken and then processed together as a noise reduction technique, and possibly also adding an even longer exposure for foreground elements combined in Photoshop or similar. Or using a star tracker on a tripod, but this necessitates blending in Photoshop if the image includes landscape elements as these are not blurred instead.

https://astrobackyard.com/star-track...rophotography/

These were my first attempts with the lens I owned. I would love to get a better one in the future, both wider and faster. I'll likely be making another Yellowstone trip 2nd week of September, so I may try some more then.

[swampfrog]

Some other shots from recent vacation. More pelicans (in flight) and shots in varying degrees of fog.

[swampfrog]

[mtnbiker]

So why do pelicans fly with their necks tucked in, but storks fly with their necks stretched out? Serious answers only, please. I'll hang up and listen.

[swampfrog]

So why do pelicans fly with their necks tucked in, but storks fly with their necks stretched out? Serious answers only, please. I'll hang up and listen.

I don't know, but herons versus cranes is similar. Herons (and egrets) crook their necks, cranes have it straight out.

[swampfrog]

Officially heading to Yellowstone for 13-15 of September. Will be out a total of nine days. The naturalist guide for my Oregon tours is coming along. We will just be heading wherever he wants the other days. This will likely be his last long trip after travelling the globe leading nature tours for 40 years, his ALS is unfortunately continuing its onslaught. Yellowstone was always going to be one of his retirement destinations, arriving sooner than he wished. He will be limited to views from the car and me pushing a wheelchair. It's not in the budget, but seeing him confined to an apartment for the past few months (because of both the disease and Covid) has been nagging at me. Mrs. Swampfrog and I agreed that sometimes you just do what feels right even if the numbers don't add up.

Any recommendations or experiences for navigating the park pushing a wheelchair welcomed.