Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
DHA

The TSN photography studio

412 posts in this topic

Nice! I just added you as a contact on flickr, anyone else on there?

My 60d decided to die today, I'm like an owner that's lost his dog :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nice! I just added you as a contact on flickr, anyone else on there?

My 60d decided to die today, I'm like an owner that's lost his dog :(

Thanks - I just reciprocated +++

My 400d has served me well the last 2-3 years, but I'm having a hard time resisting jessops 0% at the moment - very much fancy a 7d.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just renewed my flickr account for 2 years. Although there's not much on there at the moment. I'm finding it hard to find the time. :(

See my signature. +++

Edited by Sponge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not taken any snaps for ages, will need to put more effort in this year.

I sold my Nikon D40 hear last year to buy something small and compact with great image quality ;)

Riz :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hooked on this HDR stuff.

Here's one from Friday. Low sun, clear sky, very wide range of tones - but the HDR picks up everything!

Three exposures, -2, 0, +2, f/6.3, ISO 200.

There's a couple more on flickr from the same place.

6696432099_da8d934ea8_z_d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice composition and sunset - which shows the beauty of HDR - you would never have seen the tones on the foreground rocks with a single exposure +++

I use either the built-in HDR in Photoshop or Photomatix - I prefer the latter.

It's hard not to over-do the HDR - the downside is the ghosting.

There are two ways to eliminate this - either adjust strength and smoothness (they might be called something else in Photoshop HDR), or, in Photoshop overlay one of your exposures and mask out the ghosting - I've done exactly that in this image:

6654019763_960b903ac0_z.jpg.

This image had a ghost around the left side tree - but by overlaying one of the darker exposures as a layer, in Photoshop, and blending in the sky - removed the ghost. There's a few tutorials kicking about on youtube and such like.

Another alternative is to create a tone-mapped image like you've done. Then create a separate fusion mapped image (Photomatix) - and merge these together in Photoshop. There are a few ways to achieve the same end result. +++

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A photograph of something big. Taken at 6.00pm tonight.

attachment.php?attachmentid=45725&d=1330541719

post-6775-137914480358_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another. It's just about as clear as you can get in the Northern Hemisphere right now.

I should add this isn't strictly speaking "a" photograph. It is 67 photographs 'stacked' for definition. You basically have to take shots tracking Mars (GPS, automatically) because of the speed it orbits the Sun and the speed the Earth moves too, and obviously because it's still a long way away, despite the magnification, the exposure time is around 1/15th of second, which even with tracking means an element of movement. So you then take the best of 160+ images, which in this case was the 67, and stack on top of each other to build the final image.

Oh and it's approximately 141 million miles away from us. It's much much clearer when not using the camera because you get the benefit of the optics of an eyepiece and using anything between a 7mm and a 17mm means you can observe surface features very well indeed.

When I get 3-4 hours one night my next attempt is a galaxy cluster. There's no problem observing them without the camera, but photographing them is an entirely different proposition and I'm probably going to have to take between 160-300 images to get and end result worth looking at.

Mars, 5 days ago:

attachment.php?attachmentid=45726&d=1330547702

post-6775-137914480363_thumb.jpg

Edited by MrMe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A photograph of something big. Taken at 6.00pm tonight.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45725[/ATTACH]

Nice pics - what are you using to capture these? +++

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nikon D40X is the camera. But it's hooked up to a Celestron NexStar 8 SE Schmidt Cassegrain telescope on a computerised Alt-azimuth mount with GPS. The camera is then attached via a Star Diagonal adaptor with a T-adaptor plugged into that specifically for a Nikon camera. It sounds more complicated than it is, it just needs patience, trial and error.

I have a bespoke NexImage camera for the scope too but that shoots at 640x480 and is really more intended for deep space imaging. The Nikon is better for closer objects because of the better image quality whereas the NexImage camera has better metering set up for more distant objects (and it also comes with special software that does clever things with long words and stuff - which I'll happily admit I only understand half of).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a great setup. Best I've done so far with my Canon 75-300 is this.

There's some nice crater detail on yours, in comparison.

6834720033_a5d5e235f6_b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice pic, something I wouldn't mind getting into myself one day.

One of my mates text me last night saying there should be something to look at in the sky, planets in alignment or something? alas it was too cloudy to see anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a lovely shot. The scope is x380 magnification without an eyepiece (with one it's obviously much greater depending on the focal length) so there's an obvious and unfair advantage there in the photograph. Looking at the Moon without the camera, and say a 20-32mm eyepiece, the detail is much, much, much greater. Very close views on even the smallest of craters (depending on light pollution, temperature haze etc on the night). It'll give pristine views of Jupiter and its moons no problem at all on the right night, and Saturn too (which is a quite staggering sight and easily the most impressive in our solar system).

I've had motor problems with the mount recently so I'm sending that away for replacement (fortunately they'll replace FOC under warranty). You can go really silly on them and mine is a reasonably mid-range set up by comparison to many that are much more seriously into astronomy. There is a new Celestron model out with what they call Edge HD optics and with an 11" diameter lens and the views from that are simply incredible.

So is that image of yours taken with the lens at 300mm and no scope? What length of exposure did you have to use on that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nice pic, something I wouldn't mind getting into myself one day.

One of my mates text me last night saying there should be something to look at in the sky, planets in alignment or something? alas it was too cloudy to see anything.

Venus and Jupiter in alignment (the serious folks call it 'conjunction') with the crescent moon a few days ago. A very nice sight indeed.

In mid-march Venus and Jupiter will be only 3 degrees apart and there'll be thousands of amateur astronomers trying to get them both in shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks - I can just see the bank balance diminishing if I carry on reading.

Here's some info copied from the flickr description:

RAW mode

Full Manual

Manual Focus

300mm

ISO 100

f/16

1/30

Mirror lock-up enabled

Adobe Camera RAW to bring out surface details - some settings:

Fill Light 0

Blacks 50 # this adds nice contrast

Brightness +50

Contrast +50

Clarity +100 # pulls out surface details

Vibrance & Saturation 0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought it must have been at 300mm. I think you've done very well to get it on a 300mm lens with 1/30th exposure. I know the MLU will have helped stability but thats still a hell of a lot of potential shake that you've avoided. Really nice that.

Mine are both RAW images. The aperture of the scope is f/8. You have to use the scope to focus and you can't see the image on the camera display - only through the eyepiece of the camera, so it takes a bit of time and trial and error to get a reasonably good focus.

I know it doesn't look it but that Mars shot is technically far superior to the Moon because of the distance/size. Mars is an awkward little bugger of a planet to watch, never mind photograph. I've been trying to get something like that shot for about 3 months now. It's actually much easier to observe Jupiter because it's so damned bright.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another couple from the same 6pm series of shots:

You can see the difference in focus from the top of the Moon compared to the lower section - mainly due to sodding light pollution tonight (that's my excuse anyway).

attachment.php?attachmentid=45727&d=1330552878

Next one..

attachment.php?attachmentid=45728&d=1330553042

Last one...

attachment.php?attachmentid=45729&d=1330553176

post-6775-137914480378_thumb.jpg

post-6775-137914480372_thumb.jpg

post-6775-137914480365_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decided to have a go at my own moon shot, half a bottle of vodka later it was surprisingly easy ;)

post-15559-137914480384_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thought it must have been at 300mm. I think you've done very well to get it on a 300mm lens with 1/30th exposure. I know the MLU will have helped stability but thats still a hell of a lot of potential shake that you've avoided.

Yes - the mlu is definitely helpful - I've also got an infrared shutter release - so nothing is touching the camera.

Speaking of celestial bodies - here's an HDR I've just uploaded - recently taken at Center Parcs (Notts) looking over the main lake:

6795930404_ac4d2ed308_z.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0