|
Ola posted:- Fogging up lens in low temp. Do I take them out abit early to chill? Leave camera in fridge over night? You'll only have a problem taking your lenses from cold dry outside to nice warm inside, put it in a ziploc before you take it inside to prevent extreme condensation. unless you breath on it outside.
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2010 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
Oh right, thanks! I may have some geographical issues, there's a hill between me and the horizon which the moon might drop below. Oh well, we'll see how it goes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2010 00:13
|
|
|
ATF posted:Where do you live? Somerville, you?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2010 03:09
|
|
|
7D, 70-200 2.8 IS, no tripod. 200mm, f/8.0 ISO 800, 1/1000th of a second.  200mm, f/2.8, ISO 6400, 1/15th of a second. Hand held.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2010 09:28
|
|
|
 (click for flickr) D300s w/18-200VR, 1/6sec @ f/8, ISO 400, 200mm, tripod, cropped by 24% quazi fucked around with this message at 10:15 on Dec 21, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2010 10:07
|
|
|
Dread Head posted:True, but if you shoot in raw you can normally fix the WB. No, not really. Sodium Vapor lights emit almost no blue light wavelengths. You end up with basically a black and white image if you remove all the orange. It's not really possible to get anything other than an orange image or a black and white image from sodium vapor. One from Vienna, might not qualify as long exposure, but fits the theme of the thread.  IMG_6247-Edit-2.jpg by mr-chompers, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2010 11:22
|
|
|
Well done on grabbing that moon dunkman and quazi. My lunar aspirations were smothered under the overcast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2010 11:54
|
|
|
thefreshmaker posted:Somerville, you? Allston
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2010 13:17
|
|
|
Might as well jump on the bandwagon: Click here for the full 720x720 image. 1/500 seconds  Click here for the full 720x720 image. 1/4 seconds  Blend of two images together Taken with a 5d2 and 70-200mm at ISO 200 and 3200 respectively.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2010 17:12
|
|
|
Phew, thought I lost these because of condensation shorting the card, or something (it was freezing) - but I managed to recover them. So as an aside 'pc inspector smart recovery' is money. The 200mm fared okay, I think i was definitely more limited by the fact it was -20 and windy and I couldn't ever get it focused just right without freezing my hands  
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2010 19:19
|
|
|
ElroySmin posted:Phew, thought I lost these because of condensation shorting the card, or something (it was freezing) - but I managed to recover them. So as an aside 'pc inspector smart recovery' is money. Nice shots! As someone else who does a bit of shooting in the frigid, frigid cold, I'd recommend putting your camera inside your camera bag or a Ziploc bag before stepping inside. The humidity of the warm indoor air won't get at your camera or memory card, and you can let it warm up to room temperature over the course of an hour or so. At the very minimum, I've always had to let my memory cards warm up before plugging them in. Whenever I've plugged them in while cold, my machine tells me I need to format the card or just flat out won't read it. Anyway, to contribute, I set up my tiny little 90mm Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope and mounted my GF1 to the eyepiece like so.  That setup is a pain in the rear end to shoot with, so hopefully I can upgrade to something better in the future. Vibration and focusing were the two biggest annoyances, but here are a couple shots:      I don't like how much noise is in these, but I'm pretty pleased after looking over the simplistic setup I had to work with. I also took some shots of the valley here in Eagle River, AK. Just as the eclipse was starting:  And during totality. I thought it was really interesting to see just how much light the full moon reflects, as these are both 30 second exposures. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2010 22:10
|
|
|
I saw a star grow very bright and then disappear between the three stars of orion's belt a couple weeks ago, and whilst I have never looked it up, I find it neat that the northern hemisphere has it too. I have a quick question, I'm planning on heading out and snapping some photos with reala 100 and my Hasselblad. Now, I only take long exposures, usually, but I don't know enough here. I have no light meter, and I'm fairly unexperienced with film. And, here's the bit I'm having trouble with, I want to shoot at F/22. I want some incredibly sharp, long exposure night time fish-eye shots. I'll have things very close and very far away and I want everything vividly in focus. So I've got Reala, so that's some latitude, but I can't think of anything else to help me, my digital camera, no matter how good it is, can't help me work out whether it should be a 20 minute or 30 minute shot. And you star guys always mystify me with your arcane science. So I come to you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2010 22:47
|
|
|
Helmacron posted:So I've got Reala, so that's some latitude, but I can't think of anything else to help me, my digital camera, no matter how good it is, can't help me work out whether it should be a 20 minute or 30 minute shot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2010 23:10
|
|
|
I'll probably be shooting towers, so I'll have beams from 5 feet to forever infront of me. And thanks for the hint. I've now looked up equivalency calculators and they come back with something like 6 to 8 hours for F/22 on ISO 100. I think I've made a calculation error somewhere. I guess I'll head on back to F/8.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2010 03:21
|
|
|
Helmacron posted:I'll probably be shooting towers, so I'll have beams from 5 feet to forever infront of me. And thanks for the hint. I've now looked up equivalency calculators and they come back with something like 6 to 8 hours for F/22 on ISO 100. I think I've made a calculation error somewhere. I guess I'll head on back to F/8.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2010 04:50
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Dec 24, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2010 20:35
|
|
|
 christmas eve tree sales3 by torgeaux, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2010 20:38
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:This is really surreal, very cool! Came across some mouse tracks in the snow last night.   Trying to tune them on my horrible laptop screen was hard. The difference in tint was there in the raw files too, but perhaps not as much as in the result. One thing I'm having lots of trouble with is gauging how bright something needs to be. Are these too dark? I didn't want to overexpose as I wanted to keep the detail in the grainy snow but probably could have let it expose for a few more seconds without blowing it out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 15:15
|
|
|
Finally got a clear sky to do some imaging. Took a try at M42, also snagged some Pleaides and M31 while I was out, but haven't done anything with those. This is my first DSO ever, so be easy. This is 30 lights and 5 darks stacked in DSS, which resulted in a RED image and then heavily processed in photoshop. Taken with a SV80ED piggy backed on a CGEM 800 and a Nikon d60. ISO was set at 1600, which I think is too high after seeing the results. I think I must be doing something wrong in DSS because a single image looks better than the initial stack even though it brought out a little more detail. You can almost make out the running man. If any of you Astrophotonerds have any tips it would be great! Stacked:  Single 60 Second exposure:  What DSS shits out: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 19:48
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:This is wonderful. I am amazed that there is so little clipping in the houses despite the long exposure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2011 03:48
|
|
|
Ola posted:This is really surreal, very cool!
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2011 05:35
|
|
|
Here's some I took over the summer. They're not particularly great or anything. I was trying to incorporate an interesting composition while also manually focusing to precision in total darkness. Also had to get the exposure right:  
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2011 05:38
|
|
|
Ola posted:This is really surreal, very cool! Cross_ posted:This is wonderful. I am amazed that there is so little clipping in the houses despite the long exposure. Thanks. Yeah, I definitely had to try a few different exposures to get the right look.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2011 05:52
|
|
|
Pleiades star cluster, taken on Sunday night, 31x5 minute exposures on the William Optics ZS66 with my modified canon 1000D.
Jekub fucked around with this message at 13:16 on Jan 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2011 10:14
|
|
|
Australia Day 2011 in Sydney Click here for the full 1500x853 image.  Click here for the full 1500x955 image.  Click here for the full 1500x637 image.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 03:01
|
|
|
 compositemoon1 by torgeaux, on Flickr [/quote] Reminds me of the Cursive album, "Mama, I'm Swollen". 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 07:33
|
|
|
I noticed unexpected clear skies on my way home the other night and it felt wrong to waste it, even if I did only get an hour or so before the clouds rolled in. Waxing Moon, 8th February 2011.  Click here for the full 1920x1080 image.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 19:31
|
|
|
Jekub posted:
This is awesome. What focal length is this at?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 21:42
|
|
|
aliencowboy posted:This is awesome. What focal length is this at? This one is taken with my 250mm f4.8 (1200mm) reflector. It fits the full moon in it's field of view pretty much perfectly. The camera is a canon 1000d.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 22:06
|
|
|
This might be a good shot if I get this right, any tips? Apart from the massive flare, I'm hoping we get another power cut which removes that annoying street light. A ship passing in the fjord between Sotra and Bergen, next to the fish farm. And thanks to http://www.navcom.no I know it's called the Normand Ranger, it was doing 12.3 knots, 91 meters long, 22 meters wide, a draft of 7.1 meters and I knew it was coming from the live map so I didn't have to sit and wait like an idiot. (only had to F5 a website for 20 mins like an idiot)   Some funny squiggles in the lights from the ship this crop, I think it was because I moved the table the tripod was on during the 2 min exposure. If the distance to the ship is 2 km, its speed is 12.3 knots and the 35 mm equivalent focal length is 158 mm, can you calculate the resonant frequency of the table?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2011 02:46
|
|
|
 I wanted to see what 1 minute of smoking looks like. Also 1 minute: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2011 05:03
|
|
|
This is just outside the front door of my apartment building. I am going to be moving in a couple of months and I wanted a picture of the view I have spent a lot of time spacing out at.  Snow Panorama by Mark.Dawe, on Flickr I am super new to photography. Given that I want the picture for memories and don't really want to change the subject is there anything super obvious I can fix?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2011 11:05
|
|
|
 Yosemite Falls after dark by johnm3000, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2011 13:04
|
|
|
Don't remember what the time was, but it's a friend's car in total darkness.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 01:30
|
|
|
I did these a while ago, but I've recently had the itch to do more nighttime photography, and I'll probably scratch it soon! My brother in-law chillin in the lake at like 3am. It didn't get below 100F until after 5am. boo.  Construction workers on the freeway. I love the tricky perspective on this one. The generator/light on the far left is up a hill, probably 150-200ft away from the workers. surgical scar fucked around with this message at 09:20 on Feb 16, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 03:04
|
|
|
Two shots I took the other night while trying to test out my new tripod and get a few photos for a picture-a-day thing I'm doing with a few friends. I'm not too great at night stuff, but it's something I'd definitely like mess around with more. Untitled by trip9, on Flickr  Untitled by trip9, on Flickr trip9 fucked around with this message at 05:20 on Feb 17, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 04:54
|
|
|
trip9 posted:Two shots I took the other night while trying to test out my new tripod and get a few photos for a picture-a-day thing I'm doing with a few friends. I'm not too great at night stuff, but it's something I'd definitely like mess around with more. You're off to a good start. I love both of those.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 05:20
|
|
|
Three long-exposure shots I took during the Strombolian phase of the Eyjafjallajokull eruption last year. I was miles away so I was shooting at 200 or 300mm for the first two. It's get clear shots like that at night (focus was a bitch especially). I think the wobbles in the trails are from the bombs wobbling in flight and are not a camera-side error.  Click here for the full 1280x853 image.  Click here for the full 1280x853 image. And a more distant shot, which worked out to be one of my favourite photos from the whole eruption.  Click here for the full 1280x853 image. Also these are long-exposure night shots, taken very early during the early Phreatoplinian phase. High ash production seemed to correlate to high lightning activity.  Click here for the full 1280x853 image.  Click here for the full 1280x853 image. Nelson Mandela fucked around with this message at 21:36 on Feb 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 21:32
|
|
|
Wow, those are amazing shots. I really envy you the opportunity to shoot something like that. As for focus, you can just set it to infinity, manual and click away.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 13:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
Ola posted:As for focus, you can just set it to infinity, manual and click away. I've found that the infinity setting isn't always quite true, though. If I can I like to leave the camera outside for 10 minutes so it cools to the ambient temperature, then autofocus on the moon or very distant streetlights before setting it to manual again (worked for me when I shot the northern lights, anyway). With this there wasn't much to focus on, though. And it was so dark I couldn't really check the focus through the viewfinder - I just had to assume it was right! Talking of the northern lights, I guess my photos of that are long-exposure shots too! Here's a time-lapse I shot a year ago - 10 second exposures non-stop for an hour. Is 10 seconds a 'long' exposure? I'd say it is.  http://vimeo.com/20077807  Click here for the full 1600x1067 image.  Click here for the full 1280x853 image. Nelson Mandela fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Feb 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 14:59
|
|