Milky Way Arch

[rogerg (Roger)]

Another instalment from last weekend:

http://astrophotography.com.au/milky...country-skies/

As per other panoramic, it's a stitch of 20s frames although in this case landscape not portrait frames . 6D @ 6400ISO, Tamron 24-70 @ f/2.8. Although with this one it was late and I was tired so forgot to turn on tracking, so 100% shows some star trails oh well.

Regards,
Roger.

[Matt Wastell (Matt)]

Looks really good Roger!

[SkyViking (Rolf)]

That's beautiful and very colourful. Nice one Roger

[gregbradley]

Nice work Roger. I like the gentle arch you got on the MW. It often bends harder than that in a pano so that looks good. I know its hindsight but if it were taken a tad more to the right those trees would have been right under the middle of the arch. Its quite hard to predict though exactly where centre of the arch will be in a pano. I've had that happen as well.

Greg.

[iceman (Mike)]

Nice work Roger, looks great

[rogerg (Roger)]

Originally Posted by Matt Wastell

Looks really good Roger!

Glad you enjoyed it

Originally Posted by SkyViking

That's beautiful and very colourful. Nice one Roger

I'm surprised how easy the images are to process from the 6D and even with that ease end up with colour. I used to do all sorts of acrobatics with my 7D and 350D but to get colour like this from the 6D takes barely any work, just some simple levels and sometimes a touch of saturation. It reminds me of film days when my Provia 400 shots required very little work to have nice colour. I can see why others are getting such colourful shots from the 6D.

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Nice work Roger. I like the gentle arch you got on the MW. It often bends harder than that in a pano so that looks good. I know its hindsight but if it were taken a tad more to the right those trees would have been right under the middle of the arch. Its quite hard to predict though exactly where centre of the arch will be in a pano. I've had that happen as well.

Greg.

Yeah, I did move around a bit at the time but the tree on the left was much closer and moving was leaving the SMC in a less desirable location and easily blocked by the tree. In the end where I happened to be at first is where I stayed

I wasn't planning on taking any more shots at that time, was standing there talking to a fellow astronomer who was still imaging with his telescope when I looked up and commented that I should take another shot. So it was a bit of split second decision too.

Originally Posted by iceman

Nice work Roger, looks great

Thanks Mike

[Paul Haese]

Nice Roger, great colours and nice level of saturation.

[gregbradley]

I had another look and the colours are very natural. What whaite balance temperature/setting did you use?

I find white balance quite critical to the overall look of the image.

Also if you were using a mount how were you angling the camera to do some of the panorama panels as it can get very awkward and hard without some extra mountings? Do you have it upside down under the mount for some shots?

Greg.

[rogerg (Roger)]

Originally Posted by Paul Haese

Nice Roger, great colours and nice level of saturation.

Thanks

Originally Posted by gregbradley

I had another look and the colours are very natural. What whaite balance temperature/setting did you use?

Colour temp: 4400K, tends to work well for me with the 6D.

I didn't alter the colour balance at all in photoshop.

Originally Posted by gregbradley

I find white balance quite critical to the overall look of the image.

yes, I find the same. Perhaps if I had a newer version of photoshop it'd help, but I find if I get the white balance right in the first place it makes a world of difference. I often wish photoshop had an adjustment layer for colour temperature, but I'm sure there's a logical reason why it doesn't (CS3 at least).

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Also if you were using a mount how were you angling the camera to do some of the panorama panels as it can get very awkward and hard without some extra mountings? Do you have it upside down under the mount for some shots?

This shot was quite easy because it was landscape. I just had the camera on the ball-joint head on top of the Polarie and the ball joint is large enough for the camera to clear the Polarie sufficiently at my 31 degrees latitude.

For vertical shots I often use a little 90 degree plate I bolt between mount (usually the AstroTrac) and ball-joint. Got it from bunnings for $1.50 or something. Then the ball-joint is upright nicely. Pretty easy solution. It's a bit flimsy but a few seconds to let any vibrations dampen and not doing something silly like touching it while exposing and it's fine. I have in the past used a single-direction manfrotto head but now I use that under the Polarie.

All very good questions Greg, I have enjoyed the discussion

[astronobob (Bob)]

Great result Roger, has a real nice scene and compo also, would make a really cool mural

[rogerg (Roger)]

Originally Posted by astronobob

Great result Roger, has a real nice scene and compo also, would make a really cool mural

Thanks Yeah, I wish I had a good reason to print it 2m wide as a glossy aluminium print

[ourkind (Carlos)]

Nice work Roger!