Northern Lights pics????
- Thread starter wolf man
- Start date
-
Come along to the amazing Summer Moot (21st July - 2nd August), a festival of bushcrafting and camping in a beautiful woodland PLEASE CLICK HERE for more information.
I just returned from the Woodlore arctic course and got some lovely pics of the northern lights. Just really wish I had taken a tripod! I found I was getting good results at around 10sec exposure, f2.8 and 400asa. Just remember to try and keep your asa low, max 400asa as the noise really shows up in the blacks if you have it any higher. Obviouy try at different exposures too, but keep that asa low.
Hi all,
Just joined. Woo Hoo. Great site and nice of everyone to share all the info.
Bout 5 years ago me and my bro kipped in bivvy bags on a fell next to scafell n scafell pike in lake district n we got a cracking view of the northern lights 2 nights on the trot!
If you get the timing of the years right you dont have to go to norway, canada etc if it's just the lights you want to see. They truely are magical.
Dave
Just joined. Woo Hoo. Great site and nice of everyone to share all the info.
Bout 5 years ago me and my bro kipped in bivvy bags on a fell next to scafell n scafell pike in lake district n we got a cracking view of the northern lights 2 nights on the trot!
If you get the timing of the years right you dont have to go to norway, canada etc if it's just the lights you want to see. They truely are magical.Dave
I've never had the pleasure of seeing the Northern Lights (one day ) however, I have taken moon landscapes where long exposures on a high iso are an option.
The amount of noise is entirely down to the quality of the sensor, the amplification, and the processing. You will not achieve anything like as good results on a compact with a very small sensor (no matter what the pixel count) as you will with a DSLR with high spec noise reduction processing where iso 800 and 1600 (and beyond in some cases) are achievable.
BTW this quarter's EOS magazine has a good article on moonscape photography.
Cheers,
Broch
) however, I have taken moon landscapes where long exposures on a high iso are an option.The amount of noise is entirely down to the quality of the sensor, the amplification, and the processing. You will not achieve anything like as good results on a compact with a very small sensor (no matter what the pixel count) as you will with a DSLR with high spec noise reduction processing where iso 800 and 1600 (and beyond in some cases) are achievable.
BTW this quarter's EOS magazine has a good article on moonscape photography.
Cheers,
Broch
Broch,
I have to slightly disagree with you. Yes, having a larger sensor helps, but even if you were shooting on a digital backed Hasselblad, 800ASA upwards is not good, you WILL see noise. At these higher ASAs you also loose a lot of crispness in the blacks, and latitude. Yes, of course you can shoot at 800, 1600 or even 3200 but the quality of your photos will be far less then at anything up to 400ASA, especially with something as fine as the northern lights.
I agree if you are shooting c/ups of the moon, then you obviously can't have such a long exposures as the moon will be moving through your shot and be blurry, and therefore the only way too get the exposure needed is with a very fast lens or a fast ASA. Also within the surface of the moon the noise won't be so visible as it would be if shooting the northern lights in a night sky, but it is most definitely still there.
I have to slightly disagree with you. Yes, having a larger sensor helps, but even if you were shooting on a digital backed Hasselblad, 800ASA upwards is not good, you WILL see noise. At these higher ASAs you also loose a lot of crispness in the blacks, and latitude. Yes, of course you can shoot at 800, 1600 or even 3200 but the quality of your photos will be far less then at anything up to 400ASA, especially with something as fine as the northern lights.
I agree if you are shooting c/ups of the moon, then you obviously can't have such a long exposures as the moon will be moving through your shot and be blurry, and therefore the only way too get the exposure needed is with a very fast lens or a fast ASA. Also within the surface of the moon the noise won't be so visible as it would be if shooting the northern lights in a night sky, but it is most definitely still there.
As I said, never tried. I wasn't proposing to use the higher ISO settings for NL photos (sorry if it sounded like that) I was just pointing out there is a huge difference in noise reduction quality between different cameras and noise reduction processing. Whether it's good enough is another matter.
By moon landscapes I mean landscapes shot in moonlight (sorry, probably should be called moonlit landscapes) not shots of the moon
Cheers,
Broch
By moon landscapes I mean landscapes shot in moonlight (sorry, probably should be called moonlit landscapes) not shots of the moon
Cheers,
Broch
Moonlit landscapes, sounds interesting. Would love to see the kind of results you get. I guess it should really look like daylight, as all the moon is doing is bouncing the sunlight? None of this mythical blue moonlight you see in badly lit films and tv?
Exactly; it's only the human eye that can't see the colour - it's still there. I'll pull a couple together and put them up on another thread over the next couple of days.
Cheers,
Broch
things are getting much better though, i regularly shoot at iso 1000+ with my nikon d90 and the results are actually pretty damn good and most of the noise is effectivley removed by the in-camera processing and on photoshop (if you can be bothered with that)
I would rather a noisy image than no image at all
Found that one on the royal navy website today!
Im currently in the process of applying to the RFA and so if successful, may hopefully find myself shipping troops and gear up to norway and get to experience a scene like that myself!
Alec
I have had a similar picture to this as my screen saver for years I took it when was a marine Engineer Mechanic serving on H.M.S Ocean in feb 2006 it was the ships first trip to arctic conditions.
Last edited:
S
skoper
Guest
Camera some thing you have controll over/ A tripod, because you wont get much in the dark hand holding the camera,,, Start with the camera on the tripod,,, my daughter uses an inexpensive fujifilm 1500, about £100,, As a rough guide 100 asa, film speed on your camera , try 1 second then 2seconds then 3 so on,, if theres nothing on the screen up the film speed to 200 asa,, and up to 400,,,,, you should by now have an image,, it would be easier , if you told us what camera you have available to use,,,,
Not an encouragement to use this as a crutch for crappy photo technique, but if anyone has noisy shots they'd like to put to some use there's a freebie utility I've used to rescue a couple of elderly shots from a PAS camera that got pretty gravelly when the ISO topped out at 400.
It's a presumably cut-down free version of a commercial product. Noiseware Community Edition. Right now I can't remember where I got it from but no doubt everybody's pal Google will reveal something if you're interested. It provides a wide set of levels of noise filtration, and is fast. Being free helps...
Filters like this can be a bit OTT and I'm sure NCE won't suit all noisy pix. But if it helps a bit with some, that's (no!) money well spent?
It's a presumably cut-down free version of a commercial product. Noiseware Community Edition. Right now I can't remember where I got it from but no doubt everybody's pal Google will reveal something if you're interested. It provides a wide set of levels of noise filtration, and is fast. Being free helps...
Filters like this can be a bit OTT and I'm sure NCE won't suit all noisy pix. But if it helps a bit with some, that's (no!) money well spent?
Similar threads
