WildImages wrote in post #18263990
The method many use is to expose once for the foreground without tracking and once on the Milky Way without changing camera position, then combining the two. I do this using ISO 1600 with a Canon 7D. Sometimes the foreground requires 4 minutes while the MW requires substantially less, whatever is required to get the RGB histogram between a quarter and a third way up the scale.
I urge you to follow this advice, the vast majority of light painting done by people trying to acquire a single exposure of both the foreground and Milky Way look like utter crap. If you are intent on doing light painting I would ask you consider following Royce Bair's advice with regards to low level lighting, on his website here he gives a number of low level lighting tools that can be used for illuminating foregrounds:
http://lowlevellighting.org/
Remember, this is NIGHT ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY first and foremost, the whole point is to image the night sky as it juxtaposes the foreground. The biggest hindrance in modern times to imaging the night sky is light pollution, adding one more light to illuminate your foreground is adding just one more light to the never ending amounts of light that is ultimately shielding us from see the night sky. It is perfectly possible to image natural nightscape images with zero foreground lighting at all, including some of the darkest places on earth, this is a shot with zero foreground illumination taken from a Bortle 1/2 zone:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/KexDfC
Christmas Meadows Milky Way
by
Eric
, on Flickr