Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Gallery
Venus-Pleiades last night
Apr 2, 2012 08:08:22   #
tirehouse Loc: Hodgen, Oklahoma
 
We have rain forecast for tomorrow evening, so I look this last night. Canon t2i w/ ef-s 55-250 4-5.6 IS at 55mm 6 sec. ISO 1600. The 6 sec. is to long, should have been around 4 sec. for I have star trails



Reply
Apr 2, 2012 11:23:50   #
genepoole Loc: Alaska (South Central)
 
tirehouse,

Thanks for the lessons and the nice shot. Always a fascination with the stars.

Lee

Reply
Apr 2, 2012 11:53:08   #
tinosa Loc: Grand Rapids Michigan
 
Welcome to UHH.
Really like your composition.
Tried to check out your website but it is "not available"

Reply
 
 
Apr 2, 2012 11:54:27   #
Bruce with a Canon Loc: Islip
 
nice!

Reply
Apr 2, 2012 12:10:35   #
tirehouse Loc: Hodgen, Oklahoma
 
Sorry about that. I entered a underline instead of a hyphen. Thanks

Reply
Apr 2, 2012 12:20:35   #
tirehouse Loc: Hodgen, Oklahoma
 
Thanks. Here is another one shot at 154mm f 5.6 6 sec at ISO 800. Still a little star trail. Probably 4 or 5 sec should do.



Reply
Apr 2, 2012 12:22:28   #
tirehouse Loc: Hodgen, Oklahoma
 
Thanks. I've only been doing this for over 50 years and still have gobs to learn.
genepoole wrote:
tirehouse,

Thanks for the lessons and the nice shot. Always a fascination with the stars.

Lee

Reply
 
 
Apr 3, 2012 10:24:06   #
Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio
 
next time take a big search light type light and do a little light painting on your trees at the base there, it will give added dimension to your shots and is fun trying lighting from different directions to enhance your lovely star shots.

Reply
Apr 3, 2012 10:42:55   #
tirehouse Loc: Hodgen, Oklahoma
 
Lucian wrote:
next time take a big search light type light and do a little light painting on your trees at the base there, it will give added dimension to your shots and is fun trying lighting from different directions to enhance your lovely star shots.


It was pretty light out there with the moon. I'll try the light idea next time, although it'll be rough with no power. I live on battery power.. Nearest power line is 2 miles away.

Reply
Apr 3, 2012 11:53:37   #
ngc1514 Loc: Atlanta, Ga., Lancaster, Oh. and Stuart, Fl.
 
Nice shot and the trailing isn't really objectionable.

You can easily calculate an approximation of the length of a star trail by:

Trail Length = focal length in mm * Exposure in seconds * .0007

So the trail for your 6 second shot at 154mm is .065mm or 65 microns.

You can then calculate how many pixels that represents based on your pixel pitch. It looks like the T2i has a pixel size of 4.5 microns per pixel, so the star image should cover (ideally) about 14 pixels. This isn't including diffraction or atmospheric tremors.

Finally, this is for a star trail on the celestial equator where the apparent motion of the stars is greatest. You could include the cosine of the declination (of memory serves... which it probably doesn't!) in your calculation. But the equator is the worst case. Shooting north or south of the celestial equator results in even shorter trails.

Probably more than you ever wanted to know about photographing star trails!

Reply
Apr 3, 2012 11:56:16   #
tirehouse Loc: Hodgen, Oklahoma
 
ngc1514 wrote:
Nice shot and the trailing isn't really objectionable.

You can easily calculate an approximation of the length of a star trail by:

Trail Length = focal length in mm * Exposure in seconds * .0007

So the trail for your 6 second shot at 154mm is .065mm or 65 microns.

You can then calculate how many pixels that represents based on your pixel pitch. It looks like the T2i has a pixel size of 4.5 microns per pixel, so the star image should cover (ideally) about 14 pixels. This isn't including diffraction or atmospheric tremors.

Finally, this is for a star trail on the celestial equator where the apparent motion of the stars is greatest. You could include the cosine of the declination (of memory serves... which it probably doesn't!) in your calculation. But the equator is the worst case. Shooting north or south of the celestial equator results in even shorter trails.

Probably more than you ever wanted to know about photographing star trails!
Nice shot and the trailing isn't really objectiona... (show quote)


Duh ... thanks

Reply
 
 
Apr 3, 2012 12:02:19   #
tirehouse Loc: Hodgen, Oklahoma
 
Really thanks ngc1514. I'm not into astrophotography that much but I thought this was a good subject to shoot. Thanks Leroy
tirehouse wrote:
ngc1514 wrote:
Nice shot and the trailing isn't really objectionable.

You can easily calculate an approximation of the length of a star trail by:

Trail Length = focal length in mm * Exposure in seconds * .0007

So the trail for your 6 second shot at 154mm is .065mm or 65 microns.

You can then calculate how many pixels that represents based on your pixel pitch. It looks like the T2i has a pixel size of 4.5 microns per pixel, so the star image should cover (ideally) about 14 pixels. This isn't including diffraction or atmospheric tremors.

Finally, this is for a star trail on the celestial equator where the apparent motion of the stars is greatest. You could include the cosine of the declination (of memory serves... which it probably doesn't!) in your calculation. But the equator is the worst case. Shooting north or south of the celestial equator results in even shorter trails.

Probably more than you ever wanted to know about photographing star trails!
Nice shot and the trailing isn't really objectiona... (show quote)


Duh ... thanks
quote=ngc1514 Nice shot and the trailing isn't re... (show quote)

Reply
Apr 3, 2012 13:44:34   #
ngc1514 Loc: Atlanta, Ga., Lancaster, Oh. and Stuart, Fl.
 
No problem, tirehouse. The formula may interest others doing star trails.

Reply
Apr 3, 2012 15:06:23   #
Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio
 
Tirehouse... I meant the battery type that you keep in your car usually about 1-2 million candle power not a plug in the wall model.

Painting with light from off to the side on those trees will give a very different look that just allowing ambient light to illuminate the trees.

Reply
Apr 3, 2012 16:40:03   #
coco1964 Loc: Winsted Mn
 
ngc1514 wrote:
Nice shot and the trailing isn't really objectionable.

You can easily calculate an approximation of the length of a star trail by:

Trail Length = focal length in mm * Exposure in seconds * .0007

So the trail for your 6 second shot at 154mm is .065mm or 65 microns.

You can then calculate how many pixels that represents based on your pixel pitch. It looks like the T2i has a pixel size of 4.5 microns per pixel, so the star image should cover (ideally) about 14 pixels. This isn't including diffraction or atmospheric tremors.

Finally, this is for a star trail on the celestial equator where the apparent motion of the stars is greatest. You could include the cosine of the declination (of memory serves... which it probably doesn't!) in your calculation. But the equator is the worst case. Shooting north or south of the celestial equator results in even shorter trails.

Probably more than you ever wanted to know about photographing star trails!
Nice shot and the trailing isn't really objectiona... (show quote)
That's the same thing they said on the "Big Bang Theory". What year did you graduate from MIT?? Just kidding, interesting stuff if I knew what you were talking about. Eight years in college and not once did they bring this up---damned state schools.......

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Gallery
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.