Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Astronomy & Celestial 
Thread started 11 Aug 2016 (Thursday) 21:38
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1st Attempt At Milky Way

 
spooky ­ action
Senior Member
292 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 116
Joined Jul 2014
Location: Florida
     
Aug 11, 2016 21:38 |  #1

From Big Cypress National Preserve. Heavy LR adjustments (mainly experimenting). All C + C much appreciated. Thanks!


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Josh
D810 - 24-70 f/2.8G ED - Zeiss 2/135 APO Sonnar

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Kags1969
Member
Avatar
129 posts
Gallery: 62 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 48
Joined Jun 2015
Location: Austin Texas
     
Aug 12, 2016 11:45 |  #2

Good work Spooky! I see that you are using a 24-70mm and a full frame. I went to Big Bend a few months back and one of the things that I wish that I had done more of was taking longer exposures so that I could harvest the foreground in photoshop. In other words use your rule of 500/600 for the MW/Starfield, but take a longer exposure from the same vantage to get more detail in the foreground. I am an amature so take anything I say with a grain of salt. I just know that when I go back I will make sure that I have good foreground images to work into the final image.

Keep up the good work!

Chris


Gear
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
spooky ­ action
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
292 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 116
Joined Jul 2014
Location: Florida
     
Aug 12, 2016 11:59 as a reply to  @ Kags1969's post |  #3

Hey Kags, thanks for your suggestion! I do regret not taking a separate long exposure for the foreground (or even a regular exposure during daylight which I could have done). Alternatively, I probably could have began with a brighter exposure and then dailed back shadows for sky. Next time I will likely bump the ISO higher than 4000.

I am going to continue to mess with the shots because I am pretty sure I can still recover a lot of the foreground with LR (which I'm still learning as I go).

Anyway, thanks again! Here's one more without any foreground at a slightly longer focal length. I like the processing better on this one than the previous 2. Still a work in progress though.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Josh
D810 - 24-70 f/2.8G ED - Zeiss 2/135 APO Sonnar

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
spooky ­ action
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
292 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 116
Joined Jul 2014
Location: Florida
     
Aug 21, 2016 00:59 |  #4

One more from this set with different LR adjustments. I think these adjustments are an improvement (as it pertains to the MW; not really concerned with noise in the cloud).


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Josh
D810 - 24-70 f/2.8G ED - Zeiss 2/135 APO Sonnar

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TCampbell
Senior Member
452 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 284
Joined Apr 2012
     
Aug 22, 2016 14:12 as a reply to  @ spooky action's post |  #5

The foreground is a bit dark (good points already suggested about taking a second (longer) exposure just for the foreground and composite the sky back on in Photoshop) but the adjustments on the sky look great!

I do notice some elongation of the stars near the corners. That's likely to be lens artifacts from shooting at wide-open. I've got a lens (or two) that does the same thing, but I use a tracking head and stop it down to eliminate the artifacts. Based on the exposure duration I don't think that's star trailing caused by Earth's rotation.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
spooky ­ action
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
292 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 116
Joined Jul 2014
Location: Florida
     
Aug 22, 2016 14:20 as a reply to  @ TCampbell's post |  #6

Thanks T! I ignored the foreground for this one trying to get the sky to my taste. The first 3 were based upon a tutorial and an article I read. The most recent was just playing with the sliders. At some point I will go back and try local adjustments to brighten the foreground on 1 and 2 and apply the presets on the most recent shot to the sky.

The 24-70 I used is not terribly good in the corners, especially at the wider FL.

I'm going to try stacking the next time I go out. If I ever got serious I would invest in a tracker. Some of the shots I've seen using those are incredible!

Thanks again,

Josh


Josh
D810 - 24-70 f/2.8G ED - Zeiss 2/135 APO Sonnar

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AbPho
Goldmember
Avatar
3,165 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 106
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Planet Earth
     
Aug 24, 2016 09:36 |  #7

Amazing images. You get much more colour from the stars than I have ever managed.


I'm in Canada. Isn't that weird!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drlane
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Likes: 87
Joined Aug 2016
     
Aug 30, 2016 23:48 |  #8

Cut down the saturation. Just my opinion.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
spooky ­ action
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
292 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 116
Joined Jul 2014
Location: Florida
     
Aug 31, 2016 17:02 as a reply to  @ drlane's post |  #9

Thanks Drlane. I'm new at processing the night sky so it helps to know if anything is overcooked. I suspect your critique is due to the stars being too blue? I'll slide it down and see how it looks.

Thanks again!


Josh
D810 - 24-70 f/2.8G ED - Zeiss 2/135 APO Sonnar

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Davenn
Senior Member
Avatar
991 posts
Gallery: 32 photos
Likes: 486
Joined Jun 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Aug 31, 2016 17:10 |  #10

spooky action wrote in post #18112870 (external link)
Thanks Drlane. I'm new at processing the night sky so it helps to know if anything is overcooked. I suspect your critique is due to the stars being too blue? I'll slide it down and see how it looks.

Thanks again!


Yes

no prob, if you are going for the arty look, but if you are really trying to capture the sky as realistically as possible
go easy on the processing

Dave


A picture is worth 1000 words ;)
Canon 5D3, 6D, 700D, a bunch of lenses and other bits, ohhh and some Pentax stuff ;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pdxbenedetti
Senior Member
Avatar
312 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1025
Joined Jul 2015
Location: Salt Lake City, United States
     
Aug 31, 2016 17:10 |  #11

spooky action wrote in post #18112870 (external link)
Thanks Drlane. I'm new at processing the night sky so it helps to know if anything is overcooked. I suspect your critique is due to the stars being too blue? I'll slide it down and see how it looks.

Thanks again!

That's caused by chromatic aberration, not saturation, I personally don't think it's over saturated at all. Saturn and Mars look good in color and the Milky Way is a reasonable color balance ie, not ridiculously blue like most do, the first two you posted are a little too blue but the second two look good, and the lagoon, eagle, and omega nebula are pinkish like they are supposed to be. In LR if you scroll down you'll find a section where you can remove chromatic aberration, I'd definitely do that.


flickr (external link)
SmugMug (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HorribleAvatar
Member
Avatar
144 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 594
Joined Aug 2015
Location: Salt Lake City, USA
     
Sep 07, 2016 16:01 |  #12

I love the clouds and the treeline in the first shot. Nicely done!


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
whereyouwent
Hatchling
5 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2016
     
Sep 09, 2016 20:54 |  #13

Great shots! You are in FL like me trying to get some milky way shots! I have to either drive from Orlando to Ocala National Forest or go into the swamp south of St. Cloud on 441. I am curious where you get good dark skies?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,192 views & 15 likes for this thread
1st Attempt At Milky Way
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Astronomy & Celestial 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Flo29
887 guests, 265 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.