Lovely shots. No problems with banding on long exposures with the 1DsIII? At ISO 800+ I can almost always see some hint of banding with my 1DsII and previous 5D.
I was also thinking exactly the same about the star trails -surely it is impossible to get continuous trails when repositioning the camera for each stitch shot??
Brambling wrote:
I was also thinking exactly the same about the star trails -surely it is impossible to get continuous trails when repositioning the camera for each stitch shot??
He could be shooting one shot a night in an area with very consistent weather.
olyacme wrote:
He could be shooting one shot a night in an area with very consistent weather.
well that hardly will work.
Initially I thought it doesn't works, too; but then the stars move 15 deg/hour; therefore 0,0625 deg/15 sec. Enough time to turn the panohead - and nothing in comparison to the 25 min-exposure.
Off course, when stitching, you can't use the full autotmatic-stitchers, they are dull and align the stars; setting the CPs in the mountain and deleting manually any CP in the stars should work, as a first test showed. It's been overcast now for a while for a 2nd test.
Stitching the output in several layers and applying layermasks avoids the stars tracks to become to long in the overlapping parths, as they will have double lenghts in that parth, only.
David Clapp wrote:
Its a real shame as I can get all the parts for them here in the UK literally off the shelf, its not surprising though. India is the place to get them, I think you can still buy them brand new.
I ran a rolling Morris Minor shell, with doors in for scrap once...I had offered it to the Morris owners club for £50 but they turned me down and when I said I will have to scrap it then they protested but still refused to buy it off me so it went for scrap.
They drive quite nicely as I recall.
My car drives beautifully, the engine and gear box are absolutely A1 and it has bags of torque pulling up hills better than any modern run-arounds. The chassis is in great condition too. It even has the original trafficators (indicators that flip out of the bodywork) that cause great hilarity for anyone following you.
Maybe we should start an Alternative Vehicles Forum
Initially I thought it doesn't works, too; but then the stars move 15 deg/hour; therefore 0,0625 deg/15 sec. Enough time to turn the panohead - and nothing in comparison to the 25 min-exposure.
I mean you could begin your long exposure (or series of stacked shorter exposures) for each frame in your mosaic at the same sidereal time on successive nights. There would still be an error due to the changing geometry between the mountains and the stars as the tilted earth progresses in its orbit, but I think it might be possible to sweep this under the rug. It would still require very consistent skies to pull it off, though.
Starting and stopping successive frames at different sidereal times, as you seem to suggest as an easier approach, would result in some stars leaving extended trails should they hit frame boundaries and be imaged longer. It would also result in much confusion for anyone who tried to line up the starts of each trail with a star chart...
olyacme wrote:
Starting and stopping successive frames at different sidereal times, as you seem to suggest as an easier approach, would result in some stars leaving extended trails should they hit frame boundaries and be imaged longer. It would also result in much confusion for anyone who tried to line up the starts of each trail with a star chart...
...and it would be very foolish to confuse those people, for your own safety.
brainiac wrote:
...and it would be very foolish to confuse those people, for your own safety.
Well, if a semblance of reality wasn't a requirement for the shot, generic star trails could be pasted in over the mountain ridge mosaic. If it remains a requirement, at the very least, the major asterisms should not cross frame boundaries should the sequential shots (as opposed to consecutive days) technique be employed.
while thanks for your proposal, and I agree about its theoretical potential, the real situation is that the place is not in front of my housedoor, but at 2200 M altitude, about 1.6 m meters of snow right now.
I' m already glad, if the stomped snow doesn't moves to much under the tripod during one night; for a multiple night session, you had to dig to ground, put the 4m -height-tripod on it, plus a ladder in that height carring everything up - access with ski only.....3 hours of walking up.
I'm going to be there about 5 days - and wanted to make serveral of these... nightsky, with different mountains.....
I doubt much to have 4 nights with a identical atmosphere, therefore every single image might have differencies in exposures, etc....
>Starting and stopping s.......... would result in some stars leaving extended trails should they hit frame boundaries and be imaged longer<
Not correct, if the output of the stitcher is a multilayer file with the pano and all single frames as a layer on top of it. Using layermasks now, you can keep the correct lenghts.
Done that already...
About the star chart: you might be right, unless you're facing polaris
looks like a clear sky tonight: I will try another test
??