|
Ak Gara posted:How did you avoid star trails with a 30 second exposure? With a wide enough focal length, you can go 30 seconds without star trails. There are actually some star trails starting to form, but you can't really see them. I don't know what camera you have, but on Canon what you're talking about is "long exposure noise reduction." Check your manual and you should have an option to turn that off.
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 06:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:58 |
|
|
Ak Gara posted:How did you avoid star trails with a 30 second exposure? What camera do you have and what speed are your cards?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 06:15
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:With a wide enough focal length, you can go 30 seconds without star trails. There are actually some star trails starting to form, but you can't really see them. What difference does long exposure noise reduction make to long exposures anyway?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 07:35
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:With a wide enough focal length, you can go 30 seconds without star trails. The formula I keep seeing is something like 600/focal length = maximum exposure in seconds if you don't want trails. A question I have is, is that actual focal length, or effective focal length if you're using a DSLR with a smaller sensor?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 15:54
|
|
|
Falco posted:What camera do you have and what speed are your cards? It's a DMC-TZ10, which I think is called an LS7 in the US? The memcard speed is Class 4. I can do a 5 burst shot of a 1 second exposure just fine, but a 10/20/30/60 etc second exposure requires 10/20/30/60 etc seconds of thinking time after each photo. This was with a 60 second timer, f3.3, and if I'm reading the exif right, 4mm focus length?  Stars 001 by Gara Von Hoiwkenzoiber, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 16:38
|
|
|
Ak Gara posted:It's a DMC-TZ10, which I think is called an LS7 in the US? The memcard speed is Class 4. I can do a 5 burst shot of a 1 second exposure just fine, but a 10/20/30/60 etc second exposure requires 10/20/30/60 etc seconds of thinking time after each photo. I would say the post above mine is onto something with the noise reduction. Also in my experience a p&s is substantially slower at processing my shots than an SLR, but I'm not familiar with your camera so I'm not sure what is specifically going on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 16:44
|
|
|
Auditore posted:What difference does long exposure noise reduction make to long exposures anyway? It's supposed to help, but I don't usually use it. I tried a few test shots using it once and didn't see much of a difference. Phanatic posted:The formula I keep seeing is something like 600/focal length = maximum exposure in seconds if you don't want trails. Yeah 600 or 500 / focal length is the rule of thumb. I was pushing it by going 30 seconds. You can see trails if you zoom in 100%. I'm not 100% certain, but I believe you have to include the crop factor. So: 600 / (focal length * crop factor)
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 16:45
|
|
|
One of the first long-exposures I did with my E-620: Lighthouse by Setzu, on Flickr If you look close you'll see the entire frame is lightly dusted with digital specks which have proven impossible to efficiently remove, evidently an aftereffect of an overheated sensor or something. I was very annoyed by this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 18:54
|
|
|
edit: ^^^try the noise filter function on yours, will definitely help.Ak Gara posted:How did you avoid star trails with a 30 second exposure? I have a anti-noise function that works exactly like that on my Olympus E-420, it's called "noise filter". The camera basically makes a second identical exposure and then subtracts one from the other. It might be an option in some menu on yours.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 20:40
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:A question I have is, is that actual focal length, or effective focal length if you're using a DSLR with a smaller sensor?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 01:29
|
|
|
These were taken a few months ago and are some of the shots I was happier with. IMG_3337 by Rocky Bar, on Flickr  IMG_3349 by Rocky Bar, on Flickr  IMG_3345 by Rocky Bar, on Flickr Also my first Dorkroom post 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2011 13:15
|
|
|
Rockybar posted:Also my first Dorkroom post
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 13:00
|
|
|
Thanks, I don't know how I missed that tree in the bottom corner. I was thinking of cropping out the tree in the middle and making it a wide and narrow photo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2011 15:22
|
|
|
cross-post from the PAD thread... went for a morning hike in the San Jacinto mountains above Palm Springs this morning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 06:05
|
|
|
Rockybar posted:I was thinking of cropping out the tree in the middle
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2011 08:38
|
|
|
crosspost from PAD Bay Bridge by capacity4action, on Flickr  Moonshine by capacity4action, on Flickr  Lightshow by capacity4action, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2011 10:11
|
|
|
Duckjob posted:crosspost from PAD Noice. First long exposure with the X100. 2 seconds.  2011_04_15a by mr-chompers, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2011 14:29
|
|
|
Woohoo - new lens. Let me celebrate with a moon shot  
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2011 01:36
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:First long exposure with the X100. 2 seconds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2011 01:42
|
|
|
 Death Valley Star Trails by xxyzz road, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2011 03:38
|
|
|
Not my photos (I wish!), but I feel this is worth posting regardless. http://player.vimeo.com/video/22439234 I guess it fits in the timelapse thread as well but most of this one is night-time shots. His aurora one is well-worth checking out, too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2011 22:04
|
|
|
First attempt at a long exposure night shot. I tried to do some star trails but god drat it was cold out and I couldn't get the focus right. Plus I think I'm gonna need some sort of remote. Any tips on focusing on stars at night or is it all just trial and error? 20s f/3.5 18mm ISO 800
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2011 04:06
|
|
|
IceLicker posted:Plus I think I'm gonna need some sort of remote. Any tips on focusing on stars at night or is it all just trial and error? A remote is nice but you don't need one - just set it to 10 second self-timer, press it and leave it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2011 04:15
|
|
|
IceLicker posted:First attempt at a long exposure night shot. I tried to do some star trails but god drat it was cold out and I couldn't get the focus right. Plus I think I'm gonna need some sort of remote. Any tips on focusing on stars at night or is it all just trial and error? The stars seem to be in focus. To get infinity focus, try and focus on the brightest thing in the sky. If that doesn't work, just try and focus on something far enough away like a street lamp. On a wide angle lens, infinity isn't far away. On a crop sensor, 18mm, f/3.6, your hyperfocal distance is 15.8 feet (add a few more feet just to be sure you got it.) This is pretty helpful: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html Edit: Actually, the overall focus seems pretty good. It's hard to tell if it's perfect at this resolution though. TheAngryDrunk fucked around with this message at 04:33 on Apr 22, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2011 04:30
|
|
|
Interesting, I'll definitely try those suggestions. The shot of the house was the last shot of the night after I gave up shooting just stars and I'm pretty happy with the way that one turned out. The stars I was trying to shoot were in another direction filled almost completely with sky and I didn't even think to try focusing on the moon. Also,what I've been looking into is some way to program my TI83 to hold open the shutter for an extended length when I put the camera in 'bulb' mode (maybe like 10-20 minutes) to so that I don't have to sit there with my finger on the button and possibly bump the camera and blur the shot. That's the only reason I really mention a remote. I've seen how the calculator can already act as an intervalometer for time lapse which I'll have to try out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2011 14:42
|
|
|
You can buy cheap wired/wireless remotes for $10-$25. The wireless one is nice since in bulb mode the first click opens the shutter and the second closes it. The wired one has a thing that slides over the button to keep it pressed. They are both cheap poo poo (my wireless one barely lasted a year, and I'm super careful about everything), but they get the job done for a good price.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2011 21:19
|
|
|
From earlier tonight: Communications by JEB-Stuart, on Flickr  M25 by night by JEB-Stuart, on Flickr I'm not sure whether to edit out the wires over the road using context aware fill. Is it better to have more or less light trails in a shot like this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2011 22:00
|
|
|
 Vincent Thomas Bridge by xxyzz road, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2011 06:38
|
|
|
^-- Pretty lights Auditore posted:I'm not sure whether to edit out the wires over the road using context aware fill. Is it better to have more or less light trails in a shot like this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2011 00:59
|
|
|
ANZAC Morning. ANZAC Morning. by Rick0r McZany, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2011 02:50
|
|
|
How do you film guys take long exposure night shots? With my digital camera at least I can test out the settings before attempting a good shot. With film I won't know the results until I process and develop. Is it just hit or miss or is there some strategy within?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2011 05:45
|
|
|
 Skynet by JEB-Stuart, on Flickr A better one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2011 09:14
|
|
|
Went downtown last night and got a few nice shots. Changing lanes by JCleasy, on Flickr  Parking 2 by JCleasy, on Flickr  Union Pacific by JCleasy, on Flickr Big Floppy fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Apr 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2011 14:42
|
|
|
Suicide Watch posted:How do you film guys take long exposure night shots? With my digital camera at least I can test out the settings before attempting a good shot. With film I won't know the results until I process and develop. Is it just hit or miss or is there some strategy within?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2011 15:31
|
|
|
Not sure where I posted this, but it's one of my favorites:
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2011 15:49
|
|
|
Big Floppy posted:
You should try going back and going closer on the right hand third of the frame. Some thing interesting should be able to eventuate with all those pipes and framing. EDIT: Something like this is what I'm getting at: 
Auditore fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Apr 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2011 20:35
|
|
|
Munkaboo posted:Not sure where I posted this, but it's one of my favorites: I love the colors on this. Nice work! I'm jealous of those around water and major cities for photography like this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2011 21:17
|
|
|
Auditore posted:You should try going back and going closer on the right hand third of the frame. Some thing interesting should be able to eventuate with all those pipes and framing. Rules. The blue and orange look great.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 01:13
|
|
|
Auditore posted:You should try going back and going closer on the right hand third of the frame. Some thing interesting should be able to eventuate with all those pipes and framing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:58 |
|
|
A chemical plant in Long Beach. It's not by me, from this guy: http://www.tompaiva.com/index.html He's pretty much awesome at those kinds of shot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 09:22
|
|