Across the Universe

My first attempt at a 'starscape' taken at the Devil's Garden in the Escalante region.
Fire away, please! Your suggestions with my last post were so valuable and helpful to me. I'm flying by the seat of my pants here. Thanks!

And as always, cheers to Koveh Tavakkol for persuading me away from the nice, warm campfire for a little night photography.

Huge potential, but I wish the shutter speed had been shorter, thereby showing less movement in the stars. This is where I really hope Canon's new cameras will push the envelope, so maybe we can someday boost iso into previously unheard of territory (noise-free at 6400iso? I'd take that!) and get shots like this in 10 seconds.

Out of curiosity, John, what are your exposure settings here?

Thanks, Todd. I noticed that too. I look forward to the next generation of camera to achieve success with this field of photography.

30 sec.@ f2.8 ISO 6400.

If this is your first attempt, who was that guy I was shooting at night with at Stud Horse Point? Must have been that Joe Moron fellow you've referred to...

This looks good to me. Maybe boost the contrast slightly in the sky?

I don' t notice the movement in the stars at this small of a size, but I may just be going blind. Since this was facing almost north and it looks like a very wide angle, 30 seconds shouldn't produce too much star movement. But one quick trick for getting rid of short star trails is to make a duplicate layer, change the blending mode to "Darken" and move the duplicate layer 1 to 5 pixels in the direction of the star movement. You'd have to mask out the foreground (except if it's a dark silhouette with no detail) and might have to use multiple layers if star movement is different in different parts of the sky. And it can slightly degrade image quality and make the stars appear less bright, so it's not a perfect technique but can be useful in some situations.

Thank you, Grant. I was hoping that the master might weigh in here.
'Stud Horse Point'? I plead selective amnesia.

John...wishing my first attempts turn out half so well! I think you have just the right amount of detail in the rocks...keeping things on the dark side there contributes to the beleivability of the image IMO. Devil's Garden has always been on my list of wanna dos. Now, this nighttime versions gives me reason to stay after the sun goes down.
Joe Rogers

Yeah, it's best that Grant weighs in on this for his experise. I think it was you who suggested to me to try a blend of shorter and longer exposures. That's worth a try, too.

John, I really like the image. I agree with Joe's comments. So many of the night time images I see look like day time or look goofy from the use of flash. This one has just the right exposure on those rocks IMO.

Nicely done John. The foreground really makes this work for me.

john - on an uncalibrated screen I am wanting a bit more exposre on the FG rocks - but that's very subjective and after seeing that - I might tilt the other way back to this version - perhaps a logner exposure blended into the sky image ? Stars look good on this screen but its not my 30" - very nice capture - thanks for the exposure information - I don't normally do this sort of image due to limitations of my equipment but am gettign expanded ISO capability on a new back

John looks like you got some good comments, but I've done 100's of these and personally I don't think you need to shorten the shot as I don't see much of an issue with time. I just don't think you got a perfect sharp focus on the sky. Takes lots of practice and honestly luck as well to get that perfect sharp shot of the sky.

Thanks again for the comments! I think that lack of sharpness in the skies may be part of the problem. I'm glad the foreground luminosity seems to be working.

The fg is awesome, great exposure there! Personally i think 6400 just introduced too much noise here, and the sky is a bit too bright/milky, would prefer it dasker so the stars stand out more against a dark sky. Just my opinion, but i think a shot taken at ISO 800 for 20-25 seconds would have meant less noise, much more contrast, way fewer stars--but a much bolder and more impressive photo. Just my take

And I greatly appreciate your take, Stan! Thank you.

This is spectactular. I think the foreground is perfect. Until I read Stans comment I thought the stars were just right but I think he may have something. Rather then reshoot just a very slight exposure and contrast edit might achieve the the suggestion. Still if's spectactular!

Russ
http://www.AlpineGalleria.com