Star Trails

[BruceLee]

I've been doing a bit of star trails recently, mainly because I don't have time in the day to get out with the camera but it's something I've always wanted to do.

I'm still fairly inexperienced with taking them, I've not had the bottle to try a single long exposure yet, mainly due to light pollution nearby where I shoot, so I've been doing multiple exposures and stacking them with startrails.de which although a bit quirky does the job well.

Most are shot with a Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 lens, my reasoning for this was the fast aperture to get the fainter stars, as well as a small amount of subject isolation. Also because I've seen many shots taken with wide lenses but nothing much longer than 20mm. Finally it allowed me to get longer trails for the same amount of time due to the field of view, so 1 hour shoots turned out well.

The biggest problem I've noticed is that due to the longer focal length the small delay between shots (~1 second from mirror up to back down again) is enough to cause gaps between the stars when stacked, probably not noticeable on these but at full res they can be seen, the only way to fix this would be to shoot a single or longer length exposures and try and fix the gaps that way, but I guess this will be for next time.

Hope you enjoy, I'm quite happy with them although still trying to perfect my technique, but a nice way to spend an evening regardless.

My first attempt with the 35mm, gaps noticeable as I had exposure delay on also.

1

Broadway Stars by Refined Light, on Flickr

2nd attempt the next week and trails a bit better and I prefer the lighting on the building here (better shadows etc)

2

Broadway Tower by Refined Light, on Flickr

Most recent attempt, similar to the first two but with my silhouette in as I went round with my D90 and SB-400 getting some fill flash on the building.

3

Broadway Tower Star Rainbow by Refined Light, on Flickr

And some others, one from Warwick castle, and the other is Chesterton windmill, a bit of a pig to work with the windmill due to the focal length as I had to be down low on the tripod facing up, so hard to focus and compose the shot the way I wanted. Also Startrails.de didn't create the shadow on the windmill correctly, which I didn't notice until after uploading, something to be aware of in the future I guess.

4

Warwick Castle Star Trails by Refined Light, on Flickr

5

Chesterton Windmill Stars by Refined Light, on Flickr

Hope you enjoyed them, any constructive criticism welcome, this is still new to me so quite happy to learn

 

[sbi5ar]

These are awesome

I''m still slightly confused as to how they were taken...

 

[BruceLee]

These are awesome

I''m still slightly confused as to how they were taken...

Cheers

Basically get a shutter release cable for your SLR, set everything to manual (I usually go for 30 second exposures) stick it on a tripod, then fire away for however long you want.

Then you can use startrails.de which is free to produce a composite image of the stars which will create the trails.

The rest is just getting a nice location and a clear night

 

[Amp34]

I'd remove the test shot of each scene before using startrails.de...

What are your typical exposure lengths you're using? I always find that the gaps are a bit annoying but if you use longer exposures (obviously) there will be less of them and some touching up can be done. I love the composition of the last two, also the number of stars (personally I'd suggest you have too many captured in the first few). I'd also suggest they are a little overexposed to my liking (I quite like the moodyness of a darker scene), but each to their own.

Makes me want to go out and get some more, there's something about building the shot up that you don't get in any other sorts of photography as you can't see all the scene when shooting. I think with digital there really is no need to do single exposures any more, you can get far more creative with multiple exposures than you ever could with one (and you can shoot in the middle of cities and still get lots of trails ).

 

[BruceLee]

I'd remove the test shot of each scene before using startrails.de...

Wasn't quite sure what you meant then but finally realised I chose to keep them in as I thought just single lines were a bit boring, but I see where you are coming from. With the smaller dots it reminds me of morse code or something. If you mean the first one with the OOF stars then that was intentional with me seeing if it added anything, something I may work on, oh and it was the last shot as I was packing up

What are your typical exposure lengths you're using? I always find that the gaps are a bit annoying but if you use longer exposures (obviously) there will be less of them and some touching up can be done. I love the composition of the last two, also the number of stars (personally I'd suggest you have too many captured in the first few). I'd also suggest they are a little overexposed to my liking (I quite like the moodyness of a darker scene), but each to their own.

Cheers, typical exposures are your bog standard 30 second ones, then keeping on shooting anywhere from 30 minutes to an hour and a half or so, depends on if it's cold/late/I'm bored etc (I sometimes go up with friends which makes the hour long wait bearable), I've found taking a laptop with me and watching a film or something passes the time well.
As for the number of trails you may be right, these are really me testing how many I can capture at widest aperture and higher ISOs, some were around ISO 1000, mostly ISO 640 to 800 IIRC. Basically I try and shoot so that I get a large amount of trails, the fainter ones help lighten the sky, I try and stay away from shooting to get fewer trails, I see the star trails as a backdrop to the foreground object rather than just trails and shoot with that in mind.
Yes you are right on the lighting, the first one was overdone and looks flat, we lit it from the front with torches, the later ones are my camera flash walking behind the building, gives nicer shadows and texture on the building.

Makes me want to go out and get some more, there's something about building the shot up that you don't get in any other sorts of photography as you can't see all the scene when shooting. I think with digital there really is no need to do single exposures any more, you can get far more creative with multiple exposures than you ever could with one (and you can shoot in the middle of cities and still get lots of trails ).

Yep it's quite an interesting process photographically with such long exposures, takes a lot more planning and composition, the windmill one took me 30 minutes to find the right angle and composition to finally choose this shot, the 35mm didn't help with that but I think it worked reasonably well overall. You can waste a whole hour or so if you mess it up so it pays to take your time beforehand.

The castle shot was taken in the middle of Warwick at night, you definitely wouldn't be able to do much longer single exposures than a minute or two if you were after star trail without overexposing.

Thanks for the feedback, good to hear and I will take it on board for next time

 

[Fusion]

Some good results. #3 and #4 are my favs. The key here is to balance the final exposure as much as possible. #1 is over exposed, with #2 the sky is over exposed near the horizon. Should be able to correct in software.

 

[BruceLee]

Cheers, yes I've found post processing to be the most time intensive with these things, I try and edit for the star trails first, create a merged file, then create another edit with the building correctly edited, which usually is a few images stacked in photoshop etc. Then merge them together to get a (IMO) better overall image. I'm still trying to get a good technique with this though, guess when my lighting technique gets better this will improve.

As for the exposure I was aiming for that style of shot, it may be overexposed for traditional trails but I was after something different, almost a day/dusk shot effect with the trails as a background to the building, the images themselves aren't overexposed as in the sense of blown highlights.

 

[Amp34]

Wasn't quite sure what you meant then but finally realised I chose to keep them in as I thought just single lines were a bit boring, but I see where you are coming from. With the smaller dots it reminds me of morse code or something. If you mean the first one with the OOF stars then that was intentional with me seeing if it added anything, something I may work on, oh and it was the last shot as I was packing up

Ah, cool (and yeah I should have spotted the first photo was a final shot, unless the world spun the other way and I missed it!), wasn't sure if you left them in by accident, which I have done wayyy too many times!

Cheers, typical exposures are your bog standard 30 second ones, then keeping on shooting anywhere from 30 minutes to an hour and a half or so, depends on if it's cold/late/I'm bored etc (I sometimes go up with friends which makes the hour long wait bearable), I've found taking a laptop with me and watching a film or something passes the time well.
As for the number of trails you may be right, these are really me testing how many I can capture at widest aperture and higher ISOs, some were around ISO 1000, mostly ISO 640 to 800 IIRC. Basically I try and shoot so that I get a large amount of trails, the fainter ones help lighten the sky, I try and stay away from shooting to get fewer trails, I see the star trails as a backdrop to the foreground object rather than just trails and shoot with that in mind.
Yes you are right on the lighting, the first one was overdone and looks flat, we lit it from the front with torches, the later ones are my camera flash walking behind the building, gives nicer shadows and texture on the building.

In a city/well lit location 30 seconds is definately a must but in darker locations I try and get up to 5 or so minutes (really depends on the foreground and what you want to catch as much as the background exposure). That save loads of memory space and gets you less gaps in the process. Also if you haven't got one yet get yourself a timer remote shutter release! They cost peanuts (around £15) and save soooo much work, just set the number of shots, shot length and interval and you're away.

BTW I hope I didn't sound to preachy and telling you how it should be done, I certainly don't mean anything I say in that way, originality and playing around is always best!

Yep it's quite an interesting process photographically with such long exposures, takes a lot more planning and composition, the windmill one took me 30 minutes to find the right angle and composition to finally choose this shot, the 35mm didn't help with that but I think it worked reasonably well overall. You can waste a whole hour or so if you mess it up so it pays to take your time beforehand.

The castle shot was taken in the middle of Warwick at night, you definitely wouldn't be able to do much longer single exposures than a minute or two if you were after star trail without overexposing.

Thanks for the feedback, good to hear and I will take it on board for next time

I agree with that totally, it's a very different art in seeing the shot than your standard daylight photography. I've made the mistake before of not checking the foreground exposure fully (moonless night) and taken 10 minute exposures, ending up with absolutely nothing in the foreground!

Cheers, yes I've found post processing to be the most time intensive with these things, I try and edit for the star trails first, create a merged file, then create another edit with the building correctly edited, which usually is a few images stacked in photoshop etc. Then merge them together to get a (IMO) better overall image. I'm still trying to get a good technique with this though, guess when my lighting technique gets better this will improve.

As for the exposure I was aiming for that style of shot, it may be overexposed for traditional trails but I was after something different, almost a day/dusk shot effect with the trails as a background to the building, the images themselves aren't overexposed as in the sense of blown highlights.

That's how I do it too, have you found that when you stack with startrails.de the resulting foreground image can quite often be quite soft compared to just one image? Also something I'd love to try properly (and you'll really need quick shutter speeds to get the best ones) is merging all your shots into a video. I've done it with aroundd 30 shots roughly in startrails before but have been meaning to go out one night and try and get 1000 shots and make a little video.

 

[Hodders]

I love the idea, but if I am honest these all have a photo-shopped feel to them.

I think that the sky needs to have blacker blacks and the foreground needs to be less lit. I'm sure that light pollution makes that hard but I think that it would make a better image.

Please don't think I am just being negative I know how much work went into these and you should be proud of hat you have achieved.

 

[Steve M]

Impessive, but to me they just don't look real. As the person said above me they look photoshopped (fully aware that is not the case though).

 

[fiveub]

Very nice work. Looks impressive.

 

[BruceLee]

I love the idea, but if I am honest these all have a photo-shopped feel to them.

I think that the sky needs to have blacker blacks and the foreground needs to be less lit. I'm sure that light pollution makes that hard but I think that it would make a better image.

Please don't think I am just being negative I know how much work went into these and you should be proud of hat you have achieved.

Cheers, I appreciate the feedback, I'd rather people said what they thought, it's how we learn. I did process them to be light, so not traditional trails in the normal sense, I was after something different. I would say that the 35mm lens wide open gives it a more photoshopped look, although all I've done is colours etc and some light adjustments. I'm in Wales next week so will hopefully be away from towns for more natural looking trails

Impessive, but to me they just don't look real. As the person said above me they look photoshopped (fully aware that is not the case though).

Cheers, as mentioned, I think it's the focal length/lens I used that gives that sense, I don't see many star trail photos with the stars out of focus so that may be why.

Very nice work. Looks impressive.

Thanks

 

[Dokinator]

I just find this type of image fascinating :O