Starry Night

[AprilW]

I went to take the trash out the other night and we had these really amazing clear skies, so I decided to try my hand at some night sky photography. It's seriously lacking in a lot of areas , hence the post here. Any suggestions are appreciated.

Here's what I did:

12 photos taken with a 20 seconds shutter speed, then stacked as layers in photoshop using the 'lighten' blend mode.
I also Adjusted to color of the sky to be just a few shades deeper blue
The wind was blowing a bit, so the willow tree branches near the top were moving alot. I masked out that tree and the moon in all the photos but the first to cut down on the blur.

Problems I had with the photo:

1- The stars coming up as individual dots instead of an actual trail. I know this is because of the noise reduction program after the actual shot is taken. But I don't know how to either a) bypass noise reducation or b) edit it so that the trail appears as a trail and not a series of dots.

2- If I lowered the shutter speed below 20 seconds the picture came out very underexposed. But the moon is just a blob of light, instead of the nice crescent that was out that night. Would have made a much nicer picture!!

3- The blown out eave on the house across the street. I think the burn tool would work for this- maybe? But no real clue on how to use it effectively, any advice?

4- I kind of like the powerlines, but was wondering if they detract from the composition.



EXIF Data:

Taken- 3/11/11
Camera Nikon D3100
Exposure 20
Aperture f/4.5
Focal Length 28 mm
ISO Speed 800
Exposure Bias 0 EV
Flash No Flash
White Balance Tungsten (To maximize the blue cast in the sky that night)

[Preeb]

I'm no expert on this type of photography (far from it in fact) so take this as you feel it's warranted, but if you wanted the moon to look real, then one shot exposed just for the moon and masked so that is the only part which comes through, then masking the over exposed moon out of all the other exposures would have come closer to accomplishing what you wanted there. I also feel that the structures are too bright. Shooting a 20 second exposure with everything lit by the streetlight might not be the best idea. I also am not fond of the wires.

Again, I'm going by what seems attractive to me, not by any level of experience with this style. You may get some very different comments from someone who knows what he's talking about.

[AprilW]

Thanks Rick! It's pretty much a stab in the dark on my part as well. I'm brand new to phtography, and this was the very first night shot I've done. I tried some different apertures and shutter speeds, but everything but 20seconds and wide open was too underexposed :/ I'm going to try again on the next clear night we get, hopefully with some pointers from here to help me out.

I think you're right about the street light, maybe I'll expose one shot for the moon, one for the houses, and then do the stars, and try to mask out the bad parts of each photo... lol this is turning into a real project!

[EOBeav]

I would completely leave out the modern building elements in a shot like this. Go find a park somewhere, get a tree (or something similar) as a silhouette, and then go for the star trails.

[navcom]

I agree with Beav...go away from the buildings. But more importantly, get away from the lights period. As a matter of fact, the reason you get everything underexposed so easily is because of the bright surrounding lights. For star trails it's best to get as far away from city lights as they will always trump the sky in any long exposure. Unfortunately, so will the moon, which is actually very bright considering what surrounds it in the dark. So you really have to choose in a sense...moon or star trails. Getting both requires a lot of effort in post or be willing to accept the moon being overexposed.

Hope that helps!

[SwissJon]

I agree with the above two posts. In addition, I'd point the camera north if I were in the northern hemisphere, or south if in the southern. The reason being that at the moment you have a series of straight lines in your picture, by pointing the camera in the direction of the axis of rotation, you end up with arc's. This will make the pictures more interesting. Put an object, like a tree or hill or something between you and those arcs, and you end up with something far more pleasing and interesting to the eye.

Keep your shutter open for more than 30s if you want arc's in a single shot, instead of merging them. Make sure that you open the shutter almost immediately after it's closed, to prevent the "dotted" effect you have.

[dvtldav]

Originally Posted by SwissJon

Make sure that you open the shutter almost immediately after it's closed, to prevent the "dotted" effect you have.

SwissJon, what do you mean by this? I am confused.

Dave

[AprilW]

Originally Posted by SwissJon

Make sure that you open the shutter almost immediately after it's closed, to prevent the "dotted" effect you have.

I was trying to do that. My camera runs a noise reduction program that equals the time of the exposure. (If I take a 20 second exposure, it had 20 seconds of downtime afterward where I couldn't take another picture.) Is there a way to work around this?

[navcom]

Originally Posted by AprilW

I was trying to do that. My camera runs a noise reduction program that equals the time of the exposure. (If I take a 20 second exposure, it had 20 seconds of downtime afterward where I couldn't take another picture.) Is there a way to work around this?

Your camera should have a way to shut off long exposure noise reduction. Check your camera's manual. Most camera's can shut it off though there are a couple that don't give you this option. If you no option, you're SOL for doing several exposures. Then it will be just doing one long exposure as your option.