Need some help with my star photography

[Drake]

Last night I finally got to take my first try at star photography. I live on the outskirts of a small Polish town (population of about 5000), so the light pollution is pretty low. After adjusting my eyes for a couple minutes I could clearly see the milky way stretching across the sky. Here are the results:

1. First shot (actually the second one was first, but this one came out better) - taken with a Canon 1000D and the 18-55mm IS lens, set at 18mm, f/3.5, ISO 800. I shot 3 series of RAW photos:

• light frames - 15 shots, 30 seconds each
• dark frames - 10 shots, 30 seconds each, lens cap on
• flat frames - 10 shots, 1/4000 second each, lens cap on

Then I processed the shots with DeepSkyStacker. As it was my first try using the software, it took me some time to get it the way I want.

Here's the final result:

Full resolution image
One of the original light frames, converted to JPG with default LR settings

2. Second shot - taken with Canon 1000D and Helios 58mm f/2 lens at f/2, ISO 800. I must admit I did not nail the focus with this one, or I had some problems with stability, can't really tell which one. As before, 3 series:

• light frames - 10 shots, 13 seconds each
• dark frames - 10 shots, 13 seconds each, lens cap on
• flat frames - 10 shots, 1/4000 second each, lens cap on

Final result:

Full resolution image
One of the original light frames, converted to JPG with default LR settings

Since it was my first try, I guess it's not very bad, but I must admit I am not entirely happy with the results. I like the luminosity of the photo, the milky way can be seen pretty easily. But the photo is monochrome, and therefore pretty boring. The milky way doesn't have the bluish/purplish hue it does on photos shot by professionals. But it looks exactly the way it looked to a naked eye. So here's my question - what went wrong? Should there be more frames in each series? Is it a matter of settings in DeepSkyStacker? Could it be the minimal star trailing? Or was there just too much light pollution? The sky was very dark, but I guess it could be a little bit darker away from the town.

 

[EIngerson]

Try some at F8 and ISO 200 (not sure if the 1000D will go down the ISO 100) ISO 800 is not optimal for long exposure night sky.

 

[Drake]

Try some at F8 and ISO 200 (not sure if the 1000D will go down the ISO 100) ISO 800 is not optimal for long exposure night sky.

Actually it's the lowest. Optimal for cameras like the 1000D, with newer ones you go even higher. And f/8 is way too dark. Noise is not a problem with the shots. Lack of color is

 

[tyqre]

Hmm... I took a shot like this then I went into photoshop and click ctr-m and hit the auto setting. It brought out some greens and blues but that's because I was I a very light polluted suburb .

 

[andrewleephoto]

Hey Drake, I know what you mean as "it doesn't have the bluish/purplish hue it does shot by professionals.". That's because you're shooting way too dark in terms of exposure and since you're literally pointing your camera into black sky, it has no reference color to correct it! That's why you need to manually change the white balance in post processing. I've only shot stars once since i live near the bay area in california (tons of light pollution ;__, but I read a lot before I left.

I shot all of mine for 30 seconds at ISO 3200! I assume this is the image that you expected?

This shot was shot at: ISO 3200, F4.0, 30.0 sec and post processed...

Same shot NOT post processed.

Since you have a 1000D, you can only go up to ISO 1600, so you may need to boost exposure up a lot in lightroom, but if you shoot raw, it shouldn't be a big problem. Also, don't make the shutter speed over 30 seconds. After that, you will start seeing trails and the galaxy will begin to become blurrier and blurrier.


so to sum it up, shoot at a very high ISO (in your case, 1600), have the widest aperture (lowest f number), and about 30 seconds. You will get something like the second picture and then just turn up the exposure and change the white balance to get the first picture!

hope this all helps!

 

[Drake]

Thanks for your reply. The light pollution (even though it was very small) was probably the issue in my case, as the original shots were very light, and the galaxy wasn't visible. I had to stack the shots using deepskystacker, which resulted in a nice milky way view but in monochrome. I guess I have to reshoot in a more remote location.