Southern Skies - Page 2

strongmanmike (Michael) · #21 05-03-2012, 10:41 AM

Yes it's a great concept the warped Milky Way arch thing, seems universally popular and when done from our southern skies with teh hub of teh Mliky Way overhead looks pretty cool

. Slight shame the windmill blades weren't on top of the tower, that would have really capped it off I recon but still excellent anyway. I do like the way the forground objects are in silhouette though, much better than the fake lighting look IMO.

Mike

venus (Lydia) · #22 05-03-2012, 11:07 AM

surreal images Greg!

jjjnettie (Jeanette) · #23 05-03-2012, 11:18 AM

Greg, you need to enter that wide field photo into the ROG or the Mallin Awards.
Honestly, you really should. It's stunning.

willpower (Will) · #24 05-03-2012, 11:56 AM

Brilliant.

FlashDrive (Poppy) · #25 05-03-2012, 03:13 PM

Awesome shots ... both of them.
That 2nd one is brilliant .

Flash

pin3appl3 (Darcy) · #26 05-03-2012, 03:37 PM

Damn Greg...that is a cracker well in!

Almost forgot what a dark sky looks like these days, Thanks for reminding me and congrats on IOTW!!

Darc

shahgazer (Shah) · #27 05-03-2012, 06:09 PM

Incredible! Love the Southern Skies!

guggle (Michael) · #28 05-03-2012, 06:18 PM

effing awesome!!

White Rabbit · #29 05-03-2012, 06:27 PM

Great shots both of them.

How did you get the light effect on first one. Was it light paining?

Good job.

Sandy

CapturingTheNight (Greg) · #30 05-03-2012, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iceman

Apologies to everyone for the lack of IOTW's in recent weeks - I've been spending my spare moments getting the IceInSpace Shop up and running.

But what better way to get IOTW going again than featuring this brilliant shot by Greg.

Congrats Greg, it's stunning.

It's now IOTW.

Wow!!!

Thank you so much for this awesome feature Mike

I really appreciate the support of my work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjjnettie

Greg, you need to enter that wide field photo into the ROG or the Mallin Awards.
Honestly, you really should. It's stunning.

Thank you so much JJJ

I'm very glad you like it. May I ask what is the ROG??? I have heard of the Malin's of course and yes I probably will enter (unless I do something even better)

CapturingTheNight (Greg) · #31 05-03-2012, 07:33 PM

Thank you so much for all the great feedback everyone

I really appreciate it and I am very humbled by this great feature of my work.

To answer some questions:
I lit up the windmill and water tower using a torch during the single exposure for "Broken Dreams" by simply moving the beam all over the structure very quickly.

There is no real point in saying my camera settings for these images unless you have exactly the same camera and lens that I was using. What I can tell you is the key to these images is twofold. First and foremost is very dark skies, so no, I don't think you could do something like this in Sydney, David. The second is know the "600 Rule" Google it and it will tell you what it is but remember that it is worked out on "true" focal length. If you are running a full frame camera then true focal length is simply the focal length of the lens you are using. If however you are running a crop sensor (like me) then you need to apply a crop factor (Eg. Canon crop sensor is x1.6) to the lenses indicated focal length. Once you know your 600 rule then it is just a case of trying to gather as much star light as you possibly can within your time limit. That is what I have done here. They were all fixed tripod shots. No tracking involved. I hope this helps.

ZeroID (Brent) · #32 06-03-2012, 08:13 AM

A pair of stunning pix Greg. The second is definitely IOTW, I'd hang on my wall anytime. Congratulations.
Now I'm just off to google the "600 rule"

bushbark (Jill) · #33 06-03-2012, 10:34 AM

Love a star strewn sky and that is spectacular. Well done.

Ric · #34 06-03-2012, 12:54 PM

Wonderful images Greg and congratulations.

spacezebra (Petra) · #35 06-03-2012, 07:54 PM

Congrats Greg - well done! What a stunning shot.

Cheers Petra d.

JetDragon (Dave) · #36 07-03-2012, 12:19 PM

Absolutely spectacular work Greg - thanks for sharing

Peter Ward · #37 07-03-2012, 04:47 PM

I have a soft-spot for this sort of Photography.

Sublime

Poita (Peter) · #38 08-03-2012, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obsidianphotos

Thank you so much for all the great feedback everyone

I really appreciate it and I am very humbled by this great feature of my work.

To answer some questions:
I lit up the windmill and water tower using a torch during the single exposure for "Broken Dreams" by simply moving the beam all over the structure very quickly.

There is no real point in saying my camera settings for these images unless you have exactly the same camera and lens that I was using. What I can tell you is the key to these images is twofold. First and foremost is very dark skies, so no, I don't think you could do something like this in Sydney, David. The second is know the "600 Rule" Google it and it will tell you what it is but remember that it is worked out on "true" focal length. If you are running a full frame camera then true focal length is simply the focal length of the lens you are using. If however you are running a crop sensor (like me) then you need to apply a crop factor (Eg. Canon crop sensor is x1.6) to the lenses indicated focal length. Once you know your 600 rule then it is just a case of trying to gather as much star light as you possibly can within your time limit. That is what I have done here. They were all fixed tripod shots. No tracking involved. I hope this helps.

It is still really helpful to know what lens and aperture and ISO you were using. We love the numbers!

In that spirit, the 600 rule lets you know how long you can expose without star trails I think.
600 / (Focal Length) = Maximum Exposure Time for a 35mm sensor, so I'm guessing that with a DX camera using an FX lens it would be
600 / (Focal Length*1.5) = Maximum Exposure Time [I am guessing here]

So if you have a 28mm lens:
600/28 = 21 seconds before you get trailing.

iceman (Mike) · #39 08-03-2012, 01:06 PM

I think Greg said on Google+ the exposures were 35 seconds each and he was using a Tamron lens at 14mm.

CapturingTheNight (Greg) · #40 08-03-2012, 01:29 PM

Thank you very much again for all the great feedback

OK. Seeing as you asked so nicely and it's not like I have re-invented the wheel with these shots here is a break down of what I did.

So using the 600 rule. Which is 600 divided by the true focal length of the lens you are using to get the maximum exposure before stars begin to trail noticibly in a print. As I mentioned before if you are not running a full frame sensor then you need to apply a crop sensor factor to the lens to get the true focal length. So my camera is a 60D using a Tamron 10-24mm at 10mm for these shots. Now the 60D is a crop sensor with a crop factor of x1.6. So 10mm times 1.6 = 16mm true focal length for my setup. So 600 divided by 16mm = 37.5 seconds is my maximum exposure length. Mike is right that I did bring it down a bit for these shots so I shot each frame at 35 seconds. So I had 35 seconds to gather as much star light as possible. My Tamron 10-24mm is a F/3.5 lens so I shot wide open at 3.5 (I would love a wide angle F/2.8 or better). The 60D has an ISO range up to 12,800. I shot these at ISO 5000. You obviously need a camera that can handle these sort of ISO's without too much noise. The 60D is ok but I dream every day of a 5D Mk II (the Mk III is as yet unproven for me). Then it is all down to your Photoshop skills- levels, noise reduction, colour balance, saturation, etc. It took me about ten minutes to take these shots and it took me about 6 hours off and on over two days to get it the way I wanted.
Hope this has been useful. Thanks again for all the great feedback
Cheers
Greg