|
Is it a neon sign or a billboard with spotlights pointing at it? Or misted plastic with words on it with a tube light behind it? For the neon sign, just go F/8 long exposure, time relevant to ISO. For the rest, it all depends on what you want to do. Try night time HDR.    
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2009 11:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
That is sweet. That is so loving sweet. I am now trying to work out how to do that with a panorama. Edit: I don't know what a perseid meteor shower looks like, so I can't quite work out a couple things. Can you tell me the ISO and F/stop and camera used for your pictures, Leviathor? If you don't mind! Edit 2: This is the greatest thing I've ever done. I'm going to be on tenderhooks until I can print it out. I'm going to go buy an A1 portfolio solely because of this diptych. 
Helmacron fucked around with this message at 12:12 on Aug 15, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2009 05:22
|
|
|
TiberiusM posted:If I'm shooting digital (maybe you were too?), should I be concerned with leaving my sensor going for 1833 seconds? Is that why some people stack exposures? No, your sensor will be fine, if your battery lasts long enough. You might get some heat spots, little coloured pixels in your photo, but they are easily removed. What stacking exposures is for, in one instance, is catching a scene with something dynamic in it. Star trails, or even a scene with moving people. If you take six times thirty second exposures of a scene with moving people, or cars, or stars, you will have these neat trails, or just multiple of the same person or whatever in a scene that is correctly exposed. But if you take a 180 second exposure, you'll just have a ridiculously over exposed photograph. I hope that makes sense, I'm pretty fatigued.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2009 11:04
|
|
|
snowman posted:What am I looking at? I like it. On the left is a 31 image polar panorama looking up, on the right is a 31 image polar panorama looking down. The panoramas have been taken at the exact same latitude and longitudinal point, to the inch, but 25 metres straight up. And I've never seen this gigapan thing before. I don't think it would work for me, it's probably more for daylight, point and shoot panoramics, but it looks neat.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2009 08:15
|
|
|
  I wish I could just take panoramas all the time. I'm sad at my current job. Helmacron fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Sep 1, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2009 20:55
|
|
|
TomR, if you can't focus for whatever reason, you can turn auto-focus on, focus on a distant light and that should set it to infinity, then just turn off auto-focus.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2010 14:04
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Does anyone have any advice for shooting lightning? This is the crux of lightning photography. A wide lens and patience. You're onto it. EDIT: Sorry, the following is not helpful in any way but I just wanted to say it because it explains why some people get sweet amounts of lightning photos whereas others are left with taking pictures of dark clouds and street lights. The other thing is, is that where I am, in September/October/November, we have electrical storms literally every night and lightning is no thang. We get everything from sheet to lousy stories of ball lightning chasing cows/sheep that all sound mostly the same and bore the gently caress out of me. My friend has a lightning gallery. He comes from a place called Lightning Ridge. http://ridgelightning.com/ Helmacron fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Jul 25, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2011 00:46
|
|
|
Get some rape tape and make it permanent.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2011 06:57
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2011 08:26
|
|
|
Burn Zone posted:What is this and how did you achieve that look? It's a graveyard drill rig, um. F8, 30s, automatic white balance, ISO800, Fujifilm X100, JPG, tweaked in Photoshop. Lit up partially by the distant lights of rock crusher city. EDIT: I was going to go on this epic journey across the state for my five days off swing from work and photograph all there is to see at night but instead, I just slept for 16 hours and reset my internal clock to day time and now am at a complete loss of what to do. Helmacron fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Oct 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2011 22:19
|
|
|
In case you ever wondered, those towers with the wire going directly through the middle of them are by far the scariest electrical towers to climb. Nothing else even comes close. Also, nice crisp photos, man.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2011 09:13
|
|
|
Hezzy posted:Any recommendations? Next set I am going to do that "infinity focus" trick that somebody mentioned to me after the shoot. How do I cast light on objects in the foreground without polluting the shot? A torch or something? Has anybody had any luck shooting in areas with light pollution, or does that only really affect deep space photography? I don't know what your infinity focus trick is, but I like to auto-spot focus on the furthest, but largest light source the camera can see, then flick it to manual. This works for me. For painting stuff, you just use a good torch and if you like, a touch of cellophane. A good torch really is worth while for this. lovely torches end with discouraging results. For light pollution, or say, things in the foreground that are illuminated by street lights or otherwise, I myself like to take images of the stars streaking (which they do anyway in a 30s exposure) and so I take multiple exposures of the same duration and compile them with this photoshop plugin. http://timelapseblog.com/2010/03/29/star-trails-photoshop-action/ (I haven't used this one in particular but it's the same poo poo.) I hope this has been of help.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2012 03:41
|
|
|
oldmandon posted:
And you've cut the tree off, mate.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2012 05:19
|
|
|
  I really like my tiny little Hasselblad. It's so cute. It does not get women. But it's still cute! It looks like I might be going out into the mines in Western Australia. I was originally planning to go to the Arctic Circle in Russia but I got bored and came home to Australia, so my next plan is star and lightning shots in northern Australia.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2012 15:47
|
|
|
  I can't stop taking the same drat photo again and again and again. Everytime I get a photo kick, it's like "well go on, go take this photo again". And this last one is from Myanmar. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2012 01:50
|
|
|
That advice again! Find the longest focus on the lens during daylight and tape it in place. Find the longest focus on the lens during daylight and remember where it is: probably all the way and just a little teensy bit back. Using liveview, focus on a light in the distance whilst zooming in on the screen. Adjust until it's good. Tape it down! Allow the lens to autofocus with the lens cap on, then click it to manual and it'll likely be at infinite. It might not be, though! Tape it down! Test with largest ISO, and lowest F/stop first, before doing a ten minute exposure. Tape it down, if you waaaaant. I just googled other ways to do it, in case I missed something obvious, and wow oh wow. http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/FOCUS/METHODS.HTM People have crazy ways of doing this. Helmacron fucked around with this message at 06:40 on Nov 1, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 06:32
|
|
|
Romanv posted:The easiest POSSIBLE way, is to install Magic Lantern on a compatible Canon DSLR. I can't say anything to this until you clarify whether it's a joke or not.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2013 08:57
|
|
|
I just feel like it's not the easiest possible way because I don't own a Canon. And because of that, it might not ever be the easiest possible way. It's a good way for Canon users who can utilize that particular hack, though! But again, not for me. So it's just weird to say that, I think.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2013 09:53
|
|
|
 Hi! here's a partial infrared night pic!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2014 15:44
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Piquai Souban posted:
Saint Fu posted:
Amazing photos, guys. Can either of you guys give me some hints? Like, how long did you do for both of them? You're stacking, right? Do either of you have an intervalometer? If 3 hours plus, how are you getting all the battery power? Also, like, favourite aperture, ISO, WB, would be cool to know. I'm rocking out on WB 4000.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
Piquai Souban posted:1600 ISO, f3.5, 30 second exposures, at 10mm on a wide angle lens. Used a freeware thing called StarStax to stack them, and I like a tungsten white balance with some shadow + black tweaks to silhouette the barn better. Oh man, that's awesome, and I immediately bought a triggertrap. I've been thinking about buying an intervalometer anyway, so that's great. I'll check out starstax too, I've just been using that photoshop action. huhu posted:Given: Yes, if you're in a room with zero light sources. No in any other scenario. And no for the first scenario if you're shooting at F22, ISO100. This is a weird scenario. Really, if you have a camera, just give it a go. That's how you get a better understanding of long exposure photography. I guarantee you everyone in this thread had to take a bunch of lovely photos before they got anything good.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 00:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
 Long exposure, infrared shot of the mungo sand dunes (Mungo National Park, Australia) on a really dirty element. Kangaroo, emu and snake tracks in the foreground, sunset in the background. EDIT: Oh yeah and this: 
Helmacron fucked around with this message at 15:32 on Nov 19, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 13:54
|
|