Which iso for stars and star trails?

Ninja_scrotum · 29-03-2008 10:40AM #1

Have any of you done star trails before? Which Iso do you think would work best?

By the way I'm a newb so don't ATE me...

Paulw · 29-03-2008 10:43AM

ISO 100 - rock steady tripod, Bulb setting and probably an exposure of a few min.

City-Exile · 29-03-2008 10:44AM

With most things in Photography, it's always best to try things out & learn from experience.

Ninja_scrotum · 29-03-2008 11:04AM

City-Exile wrote: »

With most things in Photography, it's always best to try things out & learn from experience.

If I went by your advice I'd be sitting outside in the freezing cold from 11pm to 5am for two weeks solid "trying things out".

I just needed some specific advice. Thanks paulw.

Thirdfox · 29-03-2008 11:16AM

Lowest ISO at around f8 and longest time your battery can last (around 30 minutes?) Focus at infinity (lenses that do not indicate where the infinity focus goes to often can focus past infinity - get a focus lock on the moon and keep the focus there (by turning the focus to manual).

You end up with something like this:

dingdong1234567 · 29-03-2008 11:17AM

Ninja_scrotum wrote: »

If I went by your advice I'd be sitting outside in the freezing cold from 11pm to 5am for two weeks solid "trying things out".

I just needed some specific advice. Thanks paulw.

Well said!

Thirdfox · 29-03-2008 11:19AM

Light pollution is a problem and so are hotspots on the sensor (I didn't see too much on my D40 though).

Ninja_scrotum · 29-03-2008 11:26AM

Thirdfox that's a cool pic, although the sky seems a bit bright. Was there a full moon that night? Or would the sky end up bright even without a moon?

You really need to be MILES away from any street lights for these types of photos to work don't you? I drove a mile or two from town and had a go at a measly 30 second exposure, and the pic turned out horrible - full of orange light!

City-Exile · 29-03-2008 11:31AM

Ninja_scrotum wrote: »

If I went by your advice I'd be sitting outside in the freezing cold from 11pm to 5am for two weeks solid "trying things out".

I just needed some specific advice. Thanks paulw.

You won't be getting any from me, that's for sure!

Ninja_scrotum · 29-03-2008 11:34AM

City-Exile wrote: »

You won't be getting any from me, that's for sure!

Probably because you haven't a clue about the subject:p

Thirdfox · 29-03-2008 11:46AM

Ninja_scrotum wrote: »

Thirdfox that's a cool pic, although the sky seems a bit bright. Was there a full moon that night? Or would the sky end up bright even without a moon?

You really need to be MILES away from any street lights for these types of photos to work don't you? I drove a mile or two from town and had a go at a measly 30 second exposure, and the pic turned out horrible - full of orange light!

Yes - the bright picture is a result of the light from the surrounding area (one was taken in my local estate - sodium street lights everywhere - I had to bring the original levels down from the light blue to the dark blue that you see in the picture (of course black is what is actually wanted). Moon was present too that night.

The second picture is from the edge of the Mediterranean sea in Tunisia - lot less light but still not a totally black sky unfortunately.

One other tip is to locate Polarius (the North star) and compose an image around that - you get a sense of the earth rotating from a circular point then. And also "faster" light trails near the North star.

PixelTrawler · 29-03-2008 11:47AM

City-Exile wrote: »

With most things in Photography, it's always best to try things out & learn from experience.

In fairness, that is rock solid advice.
Ninja_scrotum as a newbie you'd do well to heed it;)

Anyway, at night play around with f settings, for example adjusting the f setting from say 8-13 can give some nice "star" effects on light sources if you are interested in general night photography. The iso should be as low as your camera can go to reduce unwanted noise.

Fire off your camera with a remote switch, timer or mirror lockup. If you have it on bulb mode, have a way to switch it off too without disturbing the camera - last thing you want after a few minutes is a little vibration to ruin the shot

Try to go to the darkest place you can find and wrap up well!

As mentioned already the moon is an ideal thing to focus on, its next to impossible (well I find anyway) to focus on stars through the viewfinder.

Just noticed your comment too about picking up an orange glow from steetlights - if you have the settings right you should be able to avoid this, even in the middle of a city.

Thirdfox · 29-03-2008 11:52AM

Joebloggs4817 wrote: »

As mentioned already the moon is an ideal thing to focus on, its next to impossible (well I find anyway) to focus on stars through the viewfinder.

Bring back etched focal distance points!!! On the cheapies i.e. 18-55 even an infinity marker would be helpful - DOF scale would be nice too - how much would it cost to paint/scratch one one? I'd pay an extra 10 euro for it...

PixelTrawler · 29-03-2008 11:57AM

My sigma 18-200MM has one so I use that, you're right though it wouldnt kill them.

I was home last weekend and theres an old Canon AE-1 SLR with a 50MM f1.4 lens on it and you should see the build quality - they dont make lenses like they used too! (The viewfinder is massive too compared to my 40D)

xshayx · 29-03-2008 12:08PM

City-Exile wrote: »

With most things in Photography, it's always best to try things out & learn from experience.

I'm normally hesitant to leave comments on here, but this is pretty much the best advice you can get. Its all well and good to take some advice of - ISO 100, 5mins, f8 - but then you are going to get a photo just like everyone else who tried this....and not get the enjoyment of trying.

Its all about messing and trying, high ISO's, low ISO's, zoom in halfway thru the exposure, try everything, thats what its all about! and if you are there til 5am after getting some great star shots, then you can get some great sunrise shots.

edit: check out peoples photos on flickr and look at the exif data

Ninja_scrotum · 29-03-2008 12:39PM

Yes that was good general advice, and if that all the advice anyone ever needed there would be no photography guidebooks, faq websites, forums (fora?) etc. to help me.

And I do try different things and mess around with settings etc... but I need to know where to start when taking photos of stars - I didn't have the slightest clue you see. Once I get used to taking regular "joe soap" star trail photos, I can start messing around.

Boards is great though. Throw up a question and less than 5mins later you have a few answers.

Calina · 29-03-2008 01:45PM

Where you start taking photographs of the stars is by pointing your lens upwards. If you understand the principles of exposure, a number of things stand to reason:

1) long exposure time.
2) finest possible resolution - ie lowest ISO value.

I have done some moon photography and I've done some star photography. Stars were a bit of a disaster because of ambient light. One of my lunar eclipse photographs made it into an astronomy magazine and is very heavily viewed.

All done by experimentation.

In any case, no matter what guidelines someone gives you, they will never be exact. You will still have to go out and just try.

Ninja_scrotum · 29-03-2008 02:53PM

Calina wrote: »

One of my lunar eclipse photographs made it into an astronomy magazine and is very heavily viewed.

Cool! Care to post a photo of it?

Fenster · 29-03-2008 03:23PM

Try stacking. It's labour-intensive, but you get much better results.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/114/365122162_5deb243715_b.jpg

http://deepskystacker.free.fr/english/index.html

ThOnda · 30-03-2008 12:29PM

Another hint I learned few years ago - avoid exposures between 2 and 5 minutes. Pictures would look smudged. To get some lines from stars, you'll need more than 5 minutes.

fret_wimp · 31-03-2008 10:35AM

Ninja_scrotum wrote: »

If I went by your advice I'd be sitting outside in the freezing cold from 11pm to 5am for two weeks solid "trying things out".

and how do you think everyone else learned?? how did people find stuff out before the web??

Even if you are told something online or from a book, practice is always a better way to learn.

I much preferr to be out trying out techniques.

i mean if i want to image a flower in shallow dof i could simply search the web and see a post saying "use a macro lens with the widest F value possible". great, but there are tons of things not mentioned there, such as lighting, exposure time, best viewing angle etc etc, that you will only learn from expirience..

I find your statment stinks of laziness.

Monasette · 31-03-2008 11:24AM

It's tricky to get a really decent image unless you're away from street lights (though I've managed to get some nice images along Salthill Prom in Galway by pointing the camera out over Galway Bay). Over a very long exposure, even very distant lights will 'pollute' the whole image with an orange glow (great if you like orange, mind).

Unless it is a very clear night, I've found that you need at least ISO400. An exposure time of 25 seconds or less will leave the stars pin-sharp.After 30 seconds or so, they will appear to move (relative to the camera). So your first test exposure when you set up at a location is how bright are the stars in the photograph when you take a picture at, for example, ISO400 at 30 seconds.

If the stars are faint, then you will need to reduce the aperture or increase the ISO (I prefer to increase the ISO myself, but that's just me). Otherwise, you will end up with very faint star trails. The second test shot is to take a 2 or 3 min shot to see how the stars are 'spinning' in the sky - you might want the trails pointing a particular way in your image. After that, go for a 15 min+ shot and be amazed.

Bring a torch - a good one. It's impossible to adjust focus and other controls in the dark. As mentioned previously, you'll need a reasonably sturdy tripod too (hang a weight (big stone/bag of gravel) out of it if required - tripod shake is no good. If you are using Canon lenses, switch off both the Image Stabilization and the autofous (manually focus to infinity). On my Canon lenses, infinity is not 'at the end' when the focus ring stops turning, so you need torchlight to see where to stop ) .

Canon cameras have a setting to reduce noise (image degradation caused by long exposures/poor light). This setting doubles exposure times, so a 15 minute exposure lasts for 30 minutes. It also doubles your own exposure to the cold.After a bit of experimentation, you can decide whether you really need it or not.

The chances are that it will be a cold night - you cannot underestimate how cold one gets standing for an hour waiting for a shot. If you have a car, sit in it. Bring an MP3 player. Bring a spare camera battery too, if you have one - the cold and the long exposure drains power fairly quickly.

Try find a spot where passing car lights won't interfere with the exposure.

Here's a link to a 15 minute exposure, complete with light pollution as an example - http://www.monasette.com/archive/001210.html.

Have fun.

/John

Dades · 31-03-2008 12:06PM

fret_wimp wrote: »

I find your statment stinks of laziness.

What is it about the internet that makes people so indignant?

Any keen photographer knows the benefits of trial and experimentation, but there's nothing wrong with looking for a pointer in the right direction. Especially when you're talking about something completely new with extra long exposures.

Kudos to Monasette (great post) and others who threw some advice in.

fret_wimp · 31-03-2008 12:35PM

What is it about the internet that makes people so indignant?

Any keen photographer knows the benefits of trial and experimentation, but there's nothing wrong with looking for a pointer in the right direction. Especially when you're talking about something completely new with extra long exposures.

Kudos to Monasette (great post) and others who threw some advice in.

I absolutely agree. the internet is there to be utilized for information and pointers and to aid you. but did you not see the OP's comment

If I went by your advice I'd be sitting outside in the freezing cold from 11pm to 5am for two weeks solid "trying things out".

I just needed some specific advice. Thanks paulw.

the OP was given advice told to try it and expirement and came back saying basically that they didnt want to put in any effort on their part. they just want to be told some winning formula to allow them to take the photo inquestion, go out for 5 minutes, take the photo without really expirementing or learning anything and go indoors again.

his phrasing of the above comment is quite rude.

Calina · 31-03-2008 12:42PM

If we were to set up a sticky with "how do I..." posts I'd recommend putting Monasette's into it. I know there's a sports one somewhere around but it could be useful for things like "how do I get that dreamy effect with the running water" type questions.

Paulw · 31-03-2008 12:50PM

fret_wimp wrote: »

the OP was given advice told to try it and expirement and came back saying basically that they didnt want to put in any effort on their part. they just want to be told some winning formula to allow them to take the photo inquestion, go out for 5 minutes, take the photo without really expirementing or learning anything and go indoors again.

his phrasing of the above comment is quite rude.

I think the OP knew that he needed to experiment, but he also needed a pointer as to where to start from.

If he was simply to go out and try - what camera setting should he start with? Tv, Av, M, P, Bulb ??? What ISO? What aperture?

Being just told to go out and experiment in that case could have taken a long long time before he found any setting that would be anything near what he needed.

While his comment towards City-Exile was a bit OTT, I think City-Exile's comment was equally as useful in this respect.

I know that City-Exile is a very good photographer, in this case, I certainly don't agree with his advice.

No one on here will know the exact settings needed for a particular shot, however, many will be able to point you in the right general direction, and then the rest requires experimentation.

Just my humble opinion.

Paulw · 31-03-2008 12:52PM

Calina wrote: »

If we were to set up a sticky with "how do I..." posts I'd recommend putting Monasette's into it. I know there's a sports one somewhere around but it could be useful for things like "how do I get that dreamy effect with the running water" type questions.

I totally agree. It's a great guide to start with.

It is always useful to get the key starting points right, for whatever type of photography you're trying, and after that you just experiment.

I'd ignore that sports advice thread ... all rubbish really. :eek:

whyulittle · 31-03-2008 01:02PM

Here is an example of what you don't want. A relatively short exposure over Lough Ree, with light pollution from three other towns coming in from the horizon

Ninja_scrotum · 31-03-2008 01:50PM

fret_wimp wrote: »

I find your statment stinks of laziness.

I don't care what you "find". If you have nothing worthy to add to this thread , don't bother posting.

I have gotten MUCH more advice than I asked for and I want to thank everyone A MILLION

fret_wimp wrote: »

they didnt want to put in any effort on their part. they just want to be told some winning formula

winning formula

Fret-wimp, can you tell me the title of this thread? Well?

Does I ask: "please tell me absolutely everything about photography because I'm too fat and lazy to do anything myself."

or did I ask ONE question - "what ISO for star trails?"

I never asked for a winning formula. Once I found out which Iso is generally the best to use, I was going to go outside and give it a go.

Thanks again to everyone for the tips & pics.

fret_wimp · 31-03-2008 02:02PM

if you expected to have to expirement yourself why did you become rude when someone on the boards suggested it. I quote you again

Originally Posted by Ninja_scrotum
If I went by your advice I'd be sitting outside in the freezing cold from 11pm to 5am for two weeks solid "trying things out".

if you dont go out into the cold how will you expirment.

its like me asking you how do i swim the backstroke, but i dont want to get wet while learning.

anyway, moving on, the cold will drain your battery and your will to live, but It does help keep noise down on the camera especially during long exposures. Any dedicated astronomy cameras are cooled internally to minus over minus 30 in some cases. DSLR's while not designed for this kind of work of super long exposures can only benifit from the cold in this particular circumstance, as when you have a huge patch of black sky your imaging, noise is your enemy.

I say again though, i duno how much -1 to -5 degress will help reduce noise but couldnt hurt!

Calina · 31-03-2008 02:09PM

Place stop arguing about it. It's only the internet for crying out load.

Copy and paste Monasette's post and have done with it. Incidentally his blog is one of the best Irish photoblogs out there.

Incidentally I like the orange glow on night shots but I appear to be alone on that.

Thirdfox · 31-03-2008 02:15PM

I like warm colours too - fun photography for me is less about fidelity and more about getting a nice picture.

edit: and didn't anyone tell you? The internet is the place to argue with random people without consequences...

Dades · 31-03-2008 02:17PM

Calina wrote: »

Incidentally I like the orange glow on night shots but I appear to be alone on that.

I think it works too.
That said, if it's not what you are trying to achieve it would be annoying.

Ninja_scrotum · 31-03-2008 02:49PM

Calina wrote: »

Incidentally I like the orange glow on night shots but I appear to be alone on that.

I agree. The light pollution on Monastettes example there suits the pic. So in that case I wouldn't really call it pollution:pac:

mikeanywhere · 31-03-2008 03:17PM

It depends on what you are trying to achieve. But here are a couple of examples of what I have done in the past.

The shot below was my very first attempt at star trails. I took it off the back of my car as I didnt have a tripod at the time. f3.5, ISO800, 353 seconds at 18mm (probably using my Sigma 10-20 at the time)

The next shot was taken when Fenster and I used to go out and do weird things at night with cameras. f3.5, ISO800, 100 seconds at 18mm again.

If I was to go out now then I would reduce the ISO dramatically and also use the noise reduction feature in the camera. Only issue with that is that whatever time you took the shot for it will be the same to save the image to disk ie 50 seconds for exposure then 50 seconds to save to card.

I have loads more but ask any questions you want anyway

Mr. Grieves · 31-03-2008 03:42PM

Fret_wimp, afaik noise is proportional to absolute temperature (i.e in Kelvin), so the temperature range in Celsius you're talking about would only result in a difference of about 1-2% in the amount of noise you'd get.

nilhg · 31-03-2008 07:04PM

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned shooting in RAW, in my very limited experience astro shots clean up well in PP, these were shot at ISO 400 with an E510 with the kit lens exposures between 15 and 60 seconds. I've upped the exposure by 3 stops in LR, pushed the blacks up to 16 and been pretty aggressive with the NR. I'm happy enough with the results considering myself and my brother in law were half way through a eskie of crown lager...

Click through and have a look at the large size, see what you think.

BTW, a truely dark sky on a really clear night is one of natures great spectacles, when I was in Australia, I spent four nights in very rural areas, two of which were very clear, with no trace of any haze, I doubt if its possible to get anything like that here even in the most remote areas.

whyulittle · 31-03-2008 07:14PM

nilhg wrote: »

BTW, a truely dark sky on a really clear night is one of natures great spectacles, when I was in Australia, I spent four nights in very rural areas, two of which were very clear, with no trace of any haze, I doubt if its possible to get anything like that here even in the most remote areas.

I was just about to say, your second photo is posted upside down, or taken in the Southern Hemisphere.

nilhg · 31-03-2008 07:17PM

whyulittle wrote: »

I was just about to say, your second photo is posted upside down, or taken in the Southern Hemisphere.

I thought all the astro heads would have noticed Crux (the Southern Cross), in the first one...........

Valentia · 31-03-2008 07:32PM

And another taken after a moxy load of pints when the tripod was a lot steadier them meself. f5.6, 1101 seconds, ISO 100. Circle caused by pointing towards the North Star (Polaris).

Paulw · 31-03-2008 07:56PM

Typical ... even when you're not fully recovered and you still post stunning images. You're just cruel.

Stunning image though.

leinsterman · 31-03-2008 09:18PM

someone just posted this in another thread -

http://www.8thcross.com/blog/wp-cont...ter-tables.pdf

Should be very useful ... with the right ND filter ...

YeahOK · 31-03-2008 10:46PM

mikeanywhere wrote: »

The next shot was taken when Fenster and I used to go out and do weird things at night with cameras.

Gasp:eek: Jeez dude it's a family forum!:D

Anyway, can someone pass me a bucket of flames till I throw it on this thread until it creates it's own little on screen orange glow:D

whyulittle · 01-04-2008 08:33AM

I give you orange glow!

YeahOK · 01-04-2008 08:40AM

whyulittle wrote: »

I give you orange glow!

Here's my contribution to orange glow!:D

whyulittle · 01-04-2008 08:58AM

Looks like it's on fire!

YeahOK · 01-04-2008 02:44PM

whyulittle wrote: »

Looks like it's on fire!

It is, it's burning gorse in Cahir. Something I'm sure everyone frowns upon tsk tsk :rolleyes:

Which iso for stars and star trails?

Comments