Wastwater by night (1st go at night photography)

Stuart Mc

Stuart Mc

Messages
1,505
Name
Stuart McGlennon
Edit My Images
No
I've been really interested in this sort of photography for a while now but have waited until now to have a go - couldn't think of a better location that Wastwater as it's quite local to me and it was decent clear night. I'm right out of depth with this stuff so any pointers please let me know.

Wastwater by Night by Stuart McGlennon, on Flickr
 
Really like that, you have done a great job of keeping the detail balanced throughout

What length of exposure and ISO did you use?
 
A great shot and the light trails are an added bonus.

It is interesting for me as I was up at Wastwater a couple of weeks ago and to see how much the snow has cleared from the fells in that time is quite surprising. I am guess that because the road leads to the base of Scarfell pike you will get light trails through the night from the folks heading that way to do the 3 peaks challenge.
 
huffy said:
A great shot and the light trails are an added bonus.

It is interesting for me as I was up at Wastwater a couple of weeks ago and to see how much the snow has cleared from the fells in that time is quite surprising. I am guess that because the road leads to the base of Scarfell pike you will get light trails through the night from the folks heading that way to do the 3 peaks challenge.
Click to expand...
Thanks yeah the trails were a bonus, think that was one car going quite slowly in the dark back towards Wasdale. The snow seems to have shifted alot with the warm weather in the past week, so much so I'm going to do Pillar or Great Gable in the morning without risking life and limb in the hope of some good panoramic stuff.
 
I had a play with long exposures a few years back and I was concerned about how hot the camera got. I was advised to be careful not to burn the sensor out which may be why people doing this type of stuff do 30 sec burst for and hour and then stack the photos.

No idea whether there was truth in this or what but I haven't dabbled in this area since.
 
skiking said:
I had a play with long exposures a few years back and I was concerned about how hot the camera got. I was advised to be careful not to burn the sensor out which may be why people doing this type of stuff do 30 sec burst for and hour and then stack the photos.

No idea whether there was truth in this or what but I haven't dabbled in this area since.
Click to expand...

I think the 30 sec burst thing is more about keeping noise in check (which may be heat related, not sure). Somebody far wiser may be able to answer that one.

Superb start to night photography Stuart. Really seem to have nailed the technique stuff down straight off the bat.

My only quibbles would be subjective personal stuff rather than technical but they are:

1. When stars are in shot, I personally like to either see static points (typically 30 sec exposure or less) or big long trails (I guess 30 minutes worth plus). Your image is sort of in the middle of this.
2. It was presumably shot in near darkness but looks quite bright. It's a tricky balance this and I often fail myself but I feel like the shot should appear darker to give context to the starry sky.
 
gad-westy said:
I think the 30 sec burst thing is more about keeping noise in check (which may be heat related, not sure). Somebody far wiser may be able to answer that one.

Superb start to night photography Stuart. Really seem to have nailed the technique stuff down straight off the bat.

My only quibbles would be subjective personal stuff rather than technical but they are:

1. When stars are in shot, I personally like to either see static points (typically 30 sec exposure or less) or big long trails (I guess 30 minutes worth plus). Your image is sort of in the middle of this.
2. It was presumably shot in near darkness but looks quite bright. It's a tricky balance this and I often fail myself but I feel like the shot should appear darker to give context to the starry sky.
Click to expand...

Thanks Graham much appreciated - I'd agree having now done this I'd prefer the stars as dots as well, I'll look at taking multiples and probably stacking them in future although the trails when done well look nice also.

Yeah it was shot in total darkness only light was the moon which was very bright that night, probably dampened the brightness of the stars. I had a bit of a task getting off the fell without a torch (had to use my phone torch app) so I've learned my lesson, always take a torch!
 
Good shot for your first nighttime foray, I'm sure there'll be more to come. Its well composed and a pleasing vista but one thing that bothers me about these type of images is the incongruity of the scene looking as though it is twighlight rather than night, juxtaposition with the stars in the sky, it just feels, odd!
 
jakeblu said:
Good shot for your first nighttime foray, I'm sure there'll be more to come. Its well composed and a pleasing vista but one thing that bothers me about these type of images is the incongruity of the scene looking as though it is twighlight rather than night, juxtaposition with the stars in the sky, it just feels, odd!
Click to expand...
Totally get what you mean, they somehow look too bright given the conditions it does feel slightly odd!
 
Very nice stuart now to try a milky way shot
 
Stuart Mc said:
I've been really interested in this sort of photography for a while now but have waited until now to have a go - couldn't think of a better location that Wastwater as it's quite local to me and it was decent clear night. I'm right out of depth with this stuff so any pointers please let me know.

Wastwater by Night by Stuart McGlennon, on Flickr
Click to expand...

You've got the exposure spot on.

Generally star trail photography is done by taking multiple 30 sec images over, say, an hour and then stacking them. I use a free programme called Starstax to do this. One of the big advantages of 30 sec exposures is that you can use the continuous drive on the camera to take them and all you have to do is lock down the cable release.

On long exposures there is more chance of hot pixels showing up in the image.

If you want to try to take images with the stars as points of light then you will need to increase the ISO, shoot as wide open (fast lenses are a definite advantage here) and keep your shutter speed to the result of the 500 rule. Just divide 500 by the focal length of the lens that you are using and that is the exposure time. Or alternatively, if you want to shoot longer exposure times, use a tracking mount.

As an example of an hours worth. Please say if you don't want images posted in your thread and I will remove it.

Llawhaden Castle Star Trail
 
Last edited:
Gaz J said:
You've got the exposure spot on.

Generally star trail photography is done by taking multiple 30 sec images over, say, an hour and then stacking them. I use a free programme called Starstax to do this. One of the big advantages of 30 sec exposures is that you can use the continuous drive on the camera to take them and all you have to do is lock down the cable release.

On long exposures there is more chance of hot pixels showing up in the image.

If you want to try to take images with the stars as points of light then you will need to increase the ISO, shoot as wide open (fast lenses are a definite advantage here) and keep your shutter speed to the result of the 500 rule. Just divide 500 by the focal length of the lens that you are using and that is the exposure time. Or alternatively, if you want to shoot longer exposure times, use a tracking mount.

As an example of an hours worth. Please say if you don't want images posted in your thread and I will remove it.

Llawhaden Castle Star Trail
Click to expand...
Thanks for that Gaz, don't mind at all for posting images in the thread, not a problem. Glad I got the exposure right even if it was probably the least effective way :LOL:

Living here in the lakes it does nothing but rain so I haven't been able to get out at night since I took the last one, although with the weather picking up I definitely intend to do it again. I'll probably do a star trail shot purely for learning the technique, but the ones where the stars appear as points probably appeal to me more. I have a 35mm prime 1.8 which would suffice I'd imagine?
 
That is a good shot, Stuart. If you want stars as points then the 500(some say 600) 'rule' is the place to start.

Maximum exposure in seconds to prevent the stars from trailing = 500/(focal length of the lens x crop factor).


For your 35mm lens you'd be looking at about 9s (or 11s if 600 is used).

The rule is more what you'd call guidelines as the length of exposure you can get away with depends where in the sky you are photographing, but it is a good starting point.

There is some useful info on star and Milky Way photography in this - http://www.lonelyspeck.com/lenses-for-milky-way-photography/

Dave
 
Tringa said:
That is a good shot, Stuart. If you want stars as points then the 500(some say 600) 'rule' is the place to start.

Maximum exposure in seconds to prevent the stars from trailing = 500/(focal length of the lens x crop factor).


For your 35mm lens you'd be looking at about 9s (or 11s if 600 is used).

The rule is more what you'd call guidelines as the length of exposure you can get away with depends where in the sky you are photographing, but it is a good starting point.

There is some useful info on star and Milky Way photography in this - http://www.lonelyspeck.com/lenses-for-milky-way-photography/

Dave
Click to expand...
Thanks for that Dave much appreciated I'll take a look - I'm on late back shifts this week so If I get a clear night I may try a couple when I get in from work.
 
Excellent images (y)
 
Really like your shot Stuart, very well processed as well. Really like the foreground and the light on it, i take it thats moon light, if so what state moon was it? Also I like the length star trails you have almost looks like comets, as opposed to the full circular star trail shots which I'm not a massive fan of.
 
Neil Burnell said:
Really like your shot Stuart, very well processed as well. Really like the foreground and the light on it, i take it thats moon light, if so what state moon was it? Also I like the length star trails you have almost looks like comets, as opposed to the full circular star trail shots which I'm not a massive fan of.
Click to expand...
Thanks Neil, pretty sure from memory it was nearly a full moon, it was pretty bright and it was the only light there. It was bright enough to get down the 200ft no trouble without a torch anyway! Its something I must get out and try more really. No I'm not into the trails either, my next one will be as points I think.
 
DON'T use a torch to walk off the fell - you will be able to see only where the light spills. Outside the beam will be pitch black and you will find the hard shadows the torch casts will also make life more difficult. Close your eyes, count to 60, then open them and avoid looking at any bright light, your night vision will allow you to see more, you will be able to see individual blades of grass, just from the light of the moon, but you won't get the nasty hidden surprises a torch will give you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top