Tuesday 25 August 2015

How To Shoot The Milky Way And Night Sky With A DSLR Camera


The Milky Way over Westport, Ontario

(Blog updated March 2016)

Shooting the night sky for the first time can be a daunting process that can be a challenge even for an experienced photographer doing it for the first time. You're operating under a completely different set of rules than you would shooting more typical targets in either natural or artificial light. So I figured I would put together this brief guide outlining what equipment is needed and the technique to get the best results out of your time under the stars. 

Things you need:

  • DSLR camera with Live View (LV);
  • Wide angle lens with an aperture of f/2.8 or better;
  • Sturdy tripod;
  • Sturdy ball head or pan-tilt head; 
  • Remote shutter control (optional in some cases);
  • Extra batteries; and 
  • Dew control
Camera

DSLRs are great for shooting the night sky, be it for tracked long exposure images or widefield nightscapes. Many people think you need an expensive camera to do this, but really, you don't. As in any case, better quality equipment will yield better results, The camera is definitely a factor, but you can still get great images even with a low end or older DSLR, Ideally, at least a good mid-range camera made in the last 5 years would be your best bet. But that doesn't mean older cameras can't be used.

Whatever camera you choose, I strongly recommend using a camera with a Live View function, LV is standard on pretty much all new DSLRs, but if you're buying used, make sure the camera you're getting is capable of it. LV is indispensable when it comes to finding focus quickly and accurately. You can still use older cameras without a LV function, but focusing will be significantly more difficult. This will be covered later in the focusing section.

My trusty, tried and true cameras are the Nikon D7000 and D5100. I started with the D7000 as it had all the features I could want and was nicely in my $1000 price range at the time I bought it. I used it for most of my earlier astrophotography work - both on a tripod and attached at prime focus on my telescopes, and it's been an excellent performer. I added the D5100 (used for $325) later. While scant on features for general photography, it has the same sensor and processor as the D7000. Since night photography is done using all manual settings, this is essentially the same camera in terms of performance and photo quality. Both are great cameras widely availalbe on the used market for very reasonable prices.

In the fall of 2015, I purchased a full frame Nikon D750. So far, the results I've gotten with that camera have been nothing short of astounding. The wide field of  view, great low light performance, and pro-level features for normal photography make it a pleasure to use. I've had the pleasure of using it for some aurora borealis photography, but I can't wait to use it when the Milky Way will be at its prime this summer. 
Vivitar 13mm f/2.8 lens

The Lens

As a general rule, the wider angle your lens, the nicer your nightscape will be. Ideally, a prime focus lens of 50mm or less (on full frame ) or 35mm or less (on crop sensor) with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 or better are preferred. You can still get good shots with a zoom lens, but use it at a short focal length as noted above (less than 50 / 35mm) and maximum aperture for best results.

Prime lenses (no zoom) are the ideal lenses to use. They result in much sharper images than any zoom lens.


If you've got deep enough pockets, a lens that uses Extra-low Dispersion (ED) glass will be your best choice, as the resulting images will be sharper and free of any chromatic aberration. My favourite 13mm Vivitar prime lens uses ED glass, and the results I've gotten with it are absolutely stunning. It's one of my least expensive lenses at around $400 and it's the one that I've captured all of my best widefield images with, particularly when paired with my D750.

Tripod

A tripod is necessary for night shoots. You can't do long long exposure images with a handheld camera. A sturdy tripod is highly recommended. A light, rickety tripod takes a few seconds to stabilize after you touch it and is easily shaken by wind. It can even transmit vibrations from people walking by. Get a sturdy tripod. They're not cheap, but they're an often overlooked part of a novice's equipment.

Manfrotto 190XPROB
My personal view on this is I don't see the sense of putting a camera and lens that costs potentially thousands of dollars on a cheap, rickety tripod that can barely support the load. One little accidental bump or kick could potentially snap off a leg and send your expensive equipment crashing to the ground. And for the best results, you need a platform tthat's as stable and vibration free as possible. And you just can't get that with a cheap, flimsy tripod.

That said, you don't need to fork over $700 for an ultra-heavy-duty carbon fibre model. But get something that's strong enough to support the weight of your equipment, won't go crashing to the ground with a little bump, and won't sway in a light breeze. It will save you a lot of frustration and potential expense in the long term.

My personal favourites are the Manfrotto Pro series. I have both the heavy duty 055XPROB and its slightly lighter sibling, the 190XPROB. They offer incredible stability and extreme flexibility in adjustment for everything from astrophotography to macro photography. Both are solid, stable and durable and will last you a lifetime. 

Tripod head

Manfrotto 496RC2 ball head
The tripod head you use is also important. Whether it's a ball head or some other head, make sure that it's steady, operates smoothly and once you lock it down, there's absolutely no play in it. The quality of your final image depends greatly on the stability of everything your camera is attached to.

I own two Manfrotto 496RC2 ball heads and a Manfrotto MHXPRO-3W 3-way pan/tilt head. All 3 heads use the same adapter plate, so I can swap tripods, cameras and heads without having to change adapter plates on my cameras.

Just ensure that whatever head you get, it's designed to handle the weight of your camera with the heaviest lens you own. It's always better to have an over-spec head than one that's too lightweight for the gear you plan on mounting on it. 

Remote shutter release

The remote shutter control is not essential, but a very useful tool to have and I would highly recommend always using one. Handling your camera causes it to vibrate. Even on a rock-solid, heavy duty tripod with a solid head, the act of pressing the shutter release will cause a bit of movement in your camera which will take a bit of time to stabilize after. Using a remote of some sort will prevent this, giving you a sharper final image. 

Most DSLR cameras have a shutter delay function. If you set a shutter delay of 2 seconds, you can press the button on the camera, and everything will have a chance to stabilize before the shutter activates. But if you don't have shutter delay, you will need a way of remotely triggering your camera. 

Nikon MC-36A Multi-Function Remote
One very handy and versatile type of remote shutter release you can get is an intervalometer as is pictured on the right. This a requirement if you intend to do any sort of time lapse, meteor, or aurora photography. They're available in both wired and wireless flavours and will have a locking shutter button that you can manually lock down when the camera is in BULB mode. These units can be found on eBay or Amazon very cheaply. 

My recommendation is to avoid the brand names, as they tend to be rather expensive with no real advantage. I own a "JYC"-branded knockoff of the Nikon MC-36 remote. It's identical in size, weight, function and look to the original and works flawlessly. I've had it for over 2 years now, use it all the time, and just a couple of weeks ago I finally replaced the original batteries it shipped with.

The cost of the Nikon unit? The cheapest I could find it for new was $180 CDN + tax at a local shop. The cost of the eBay knockoff? $25 CDN shipped from China. You do the math and decide if having a little Nikon or Canon logo on your intervalometer is worth the extra $150 to you.

Batteries

You wouldn't think this needs to be said, but it does. This is simple enough. Buy extra batteries for your camera and make sure they're charged. Nothing ends a photo session early on such a sour note as finding out you drove an hour or more to a dark site only to have your only battery die on you within minutes of arrival. The number of times I've seen this happen to people is borders on the ridiculous.

Another good idea is adding a battery grip to your camera to house a second battery. This can significantly extent a photo session before you need to replace batteries. But keep in mind that brand name battery grips aren't cheap. Depending on your camera, they can cost anywhere from $200-400. Knockoff brands can range from $40-80 on eBay or Amazon, and will sometimes come with extra batteries. While this seems like an attractive proposition, most are made of cheap, flimsy plastic. Since you'll be attaching your tripod plate to the bottom of this grip to attach it to your tripod's head, you're potentially instability into your setup, as the plastic will flex when you touch the camera or in a breeze, causing sway.

I can attest to this point from personal experience. I have a knockoff  plastic battery grip for my D750.  While excellent for handheld use, it's useless for night photography When mated with the Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8G or Vivitar 13mm (both very heavy lenses), it's too unstable to use on a tripod. However, I have a Nikon-branded  grip for my D7000. It's made of the same magnesium alloy as the camera's body. Despite the D7000 being a heavier camera body, it's rock solid on a tripod with the same heavy lenses.

Dew control

If you're in a humid climate, inevitably you'll find that your lenses will start to fog up with dew -  another problem that ends many photo sessions short.. You might start wiping the dew off with your lens cloth, but you'll find this will only buy you a couple of minutes are best.

Hand warmers keeping my lens dew-free
But it doesn't have to be that way. There's a cheap and simple solution exists for this problem - hand warmers. That's right. Those little packets of chemical hand warmers that you can put in your mittens in winter to keep your fingers warm are your lens' best friend out on a humid night. They can be bought in large packets at most sporting good stores and other locations. Take them out of their packaging, activate them by shaking them, and then attach them to the top and bottom of your lens using a wide rubber band. And be sure to attach them to your lens at the beginning of your session. You want to proactively prevent dew from forming by keeping the lens a couple of degrees above the dew point. Adding them after the dew has already formed is far less effective, because your entire lens, its elements and internals will have cooled, and it will take a long time for the hand warmers to bring the temperature back up to above the dew point.

Sure, this solution looks silly as hell and some people will laugh at you for it. It's happened to me. But I'm the one who's left laughing when they're packing up early due to dew while my lens is clear despite the fact it's been pointing straight up all evening.

The Digital After Dark LensMuff
An even more elegant dew control solution is a great little item called the LensMuff from Kevin Adams Photography / Digital After Dark. It's a small nylon sleeve with a velcro strap that can hold 3 hand warmers. It neatly wraps around your lens and traps the heat of the hand warmers, making it even more effective than just holding the hand warmers in place with a rubber band. I've been using these for some time now, and I love them. I've even used one on the finder scope on my telescope to keep it dew free. If you're serious about night photography, this is an amazing product that you really should consider.

The process

So now you have all the equipment you need. You need to find yourself a dark site away from city lights. The farther, the better. While the sky may appear dark a short distance outside of an urban area, long exposure photography will bring out sky glow you may won't notice with the naked eye.

Depending on where you live, the best parts of the Milky Way will be visible at different times of year. In the northern hemisphere, the Milky Way is visible before midnight between May and September, with best time of the year for visibility being July when the core is the highest above the horizon. At lower latitudes, more of the core (the good part) will be visible.

You also want to make sure you're shooting on a moonless night, as moonlight washes out the details of the Milky Way like city light pollution does. The New Moon is the best time to shoot since you'll have no moon to contend with. For a week or so after the New Moon, the moon will set reasonably early, so you're still good to get some shots after it sets. The week before the New Moon, the moon will rise late in the night (40 minutes later each day), so you're good for some shooting before it rises. So in brief, you have about a 10 day window each lunar cycle where the conditions will be great for photographing the Milky Way. 

Camera settings
  • Manual mode
  • Aperture wide open
  • ISO setting
  • Disable noise reduction
  • White balance adjustment
  • Exposure time
  • Focus
First and foremost, you need to have your camera set to FULL MANUAL mode, or M on your mode selector dial. There's no automatic setting for the sky. I've seen many people struggle with the "nightscape" settings on their cameras, and nothing good ever comes from it! If you have any type of automatic setting on your camera, turn it off.

One very important point that needs to be stated: SHOOT IN RAW MODE. Never shoot the night sky in JPG, as compression will prevent you from being able to properly post-process the image. The files might be larger, but that extra size means extra quality. Set your image to RAW-F, or the finest quality and highest resolution your camera is capable of. 

Your aperture needs to be wide open for the lens you're using to allow in as much light as possible. Depth of field is irrelevant for night photos. You focus on the stars, even if there's landscape in the foreground. As I stated, the best results will come from a lens that opens to at least f/2.8. The wider the better. My 35mm f/1.8 lens is absolutely amazing for getting fine detail and contrast in the Milky Way. I've seen a 35mm f/1.4 lens used, and it basically blew me away with how much difference there was. As with telescopes, when it comes to shooting the sky, aperture is king. Bigger and faster is better for collecting as many photons as possible.

Your ISO settings will depend on your camera. Your ISO is your sensor's gain, or amplification. The higher the number, the more your signal is amplified. The down side of this is it also amplifies noise generated in your sensor. Modern full frame sensors can easily handle ISO settings up to 3200 or higher. Lower end cameras may only be able to handle 2000 or 1600 before adding too much noise. This is a setting you'll have to experiment with. I would recommend starting at ISO 2000, taking a shot, and adjusting up or down depending on the noise present in your image until you find a sweet spot you can live with.

One of my scopes imaging with the Milky Way in the background.
Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/crunchmeister/20410658386/in/dateposted-public/

Most DSLRs will also have 1 or 2 different noise reduction (NR) routines built in. One is known as Long Exposure NR, the other is High ISO NR. Both sound really good when shooting the night sky, but have their drawbacks.

Long Exposure NR is actually a very usable one. When you take an image, the camera will automatically take a second image at the exact same exposure length and ISO, but with your shutter closed. This is known as a dark frame. This is basically an image of the noise generated by your sensor. The dark frame is then digitally subtracted from your original image, called the light frame. This leaves you with a much cleaner final image. While this sounds good, you now take double the amount of time to shoot 1 picture.

The down side of Long Exposue NR is that if you're trying to shoot star trails or time lapse, this double time will leave gaps in your trails and give you far fewer frames for your time lapse. Most people find it preferable to either do manual dark frame subtraction, or use no dark frames at all. After a while, you'll become familiar your camera's performance and any noise will be easily managed with luminance noise reduction in Lightroom or Camera Raw.

If you want to push your camera and want to do manual dark frame subtraction, the proces is quite simple. Take a bunch of pictures of the sky normally. Before you finish, cap off your lens and snap off a dark frame. In your post processing in Photoshop, you can take this dark frame, layer it on top of your light frame (before making any adjustments to it) in a separate layer, and switch your blending more to "subtract". This dark frame subtraction will clean up your images of your sensor noise. Just keep in mind that dark frames are temperature-dependent. You have to shoot it at the same temperature as your light frame. If you were out on a cold night, forgot to shoot your dark, and then trying to shoot it inside your warm house the next day, it won't work.

High ISO NR is another one that seems to make sense at first thought. You're using high ISO that introduces noise, so why not let the camera automatically remove it? For regular low light photography, this actually works quite well. For night sky photography, the camera can't tell the difference between faint stars and noise and the camera will detect faint stars in your image as noise and remove them. When shooting the Milky Way, faint stars are what give it its cloudy appearance. Using High ISO NR will basically kill your image. Don't use it!

White balance is another one of these settings that you need to experiment with. Just don't use auto white balance. There are different schools of thought on white balance. Some people like to use sunlight / daylight settings, which I find work well. Others choose the tungsten light setting, which also gives good results. Personally, I like to set the colour temperature directly. I find that in post processing, I tend to tweak my temperature somewhere in the range of 3500-3750ยบ K. This tends to give me the best colour balance for the Milky Way. I find this tends to vary on different cameras. I'd say the best is to experiment and find what gives you the colours you like best. In any case, you'll be shooting in RAW mode (never JPG), so you'll be able to make your white balance adjustments in post processing, so this isn't a crucial setting in the field.

Finally, the big setting is your exposure time. This is the one that gives photographers the most difficulty. Because the Earth rotates, it gives the appearance that the sky is moving. If an exposure is too long, stars in your image will change from points to hyphens. You want to be able to expose your image for as long as possible without introducing this star trailing. Your exposure length will vary on the lens you're using. The shorter your focal length, the longer you'll be able to expose without visible trailing. You may have heard of the Rule of 600 or Rule of 500. Personally, I use the latter, as it has tighter tolerances.

The Rule of 500 goes as such:
xT  = 500 / (f x C)

Where:

xT = exposure time (in seconds)
f  = focal length of your lens (in mm)
C  = crop factor of your sensor (use 1 for full frame, 1.6 for Canon, 1.5 for Nikon and Fuji crop sensors)
So in my case, I ,mostly use my Vivitar 13mm lens on my D7000 with a crop sensor. For that lens, my exposure time is:
xT = 500 / (13 x 1.5)
xT = 25.6 seconds.
I also like using my 35mm f/1.8 lens for it's larger aperture when I do panoramas of the Milky Way, so:
xT = 500 / (35 x 1.5)
xT =  9.5 seconds
For comparison, my 13mm lens when used on my full frame D750
xT = 500 / (13 x 1)
xT = 38.4 seconds.
As you can see, the difference between exposure times for different lenses varies greatly, and you'll get far longer exposure times on a full frame camera over a crop sensor.

Reflections From Eternity
Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/crunchmeister/18445879194/in/dateposted-public/
Getting ready to shoot


So now, you're ready to shoot! But there's 1 last, key process to take care of. And for many first time night photographers, this can be by far the most daunting - FOCUS! It will require some tweaking, but with practice, following these steps will make the process a lot easier. 

Focus in 7 easy steps:
  1. Turn off auto focus (very important)
  2. Find the brightest star you can see in the sky. In the summer from the northern hemisphere, that will be Arcturus, which you can easily find be found by tracing a line outwards from the handle of the Big Dipper. It's a big orange star. You can't miss it.
  3. Using your camera's viewfinder (not LV), find the star and centre it in your field of view. Get rough focus that way;
  4. Enable your LV. The star should be visible.
  5. Using your LV's digital zoom, zoom in to full power on the star;
  6. Now using your focus ring, adjust your focus until the star is as small a pinpoint as possible.
  7. Once you achieve focus, DON'T TOUCH YOUR FOCUS RING AGAIN UNLESS YOU CHANGE LENSES. A small piece of tape can be use to secure the focus ring and ensure that you don't accidentally knock it out of focus handling the camera.
Now that we've covered focusing, it's worthwhile expanding on a couple of those points. At Step 6, you'll be adjusting your focus. This can be a bit difficult, as touching your focus ring will cause your camera to move and shake, making focus difficult. This is where having a sturdy tripod with a solid head will make a huge difference. The more stable your support, the less shake you'll get while adjusting focus, making focusing easier and far more precise.

Step 7 is one I could have left out, but I added on for the photographers that can't leave their focus rings alone. I've noticed a lot of experienced daylight photographers are so used to holding onto their focus rings and constantly adjusting them. And that's fine for doing daylight or studio photography. but for astrophotography, it's a big no-no and a habit that needs to be broken. Once you have focus on 1 star, you're now in focus for anything else in the sky and further adjustments are not required.

At this point, you're set to shoot and it's all about your creativity. Composition, adding landscape, and compositing images are beyond the scope of this article. But now you have all the information you need to capture great images of the night sky using your DSLR.

So until next time, clear skies, and keep those eyes and lenses pointed up!

Monday 24 August 2015

When The Stars Align

So it's been a while since my last writeup. I guess I could and SHOULD have written some stuff, because I've been quite busy on the astro-front this summer. Anyone who's following my Facebook page, the different Facebook groups I'm a member of, or my Flickr page will see I've been quite busy with photography! 

Not only have I been taking pics of the sky, but I've been branching out a bit learning to use my camera on stuff that isn't in space for a change! So far, it's been mostly landscape, cityscape and night photography. I've also been dabbling in time lapse photography, which I've really been enjoying. As a result, I didn't want my wonderful Nikon D7000 to be permanently attached to my scope. And I like this camera specifically because the 16 MP sensor in the D7000 has the best low light performance of any other Nikon or Canon crop sensor. So I decided that rather than buying another expensive camera, I would get myself a used Nikon D5100, which shares the same sensor and processor as the D7000. This camera is lighter on features, so it would become my main astro-camera (to be full spectrum modded in the future) while my D7000 would be used to shoot other stuff. And I've been getting a lot of use out of both! For the $325 I paid for my D5100, it was a brilliant purchase!

But I digress... And now, onto the real point of this blog entry.

Much like with anything else, you have good and bad days in astrophotography. Sometimes, problems are self-inflicted, and other times they're beyond our control. Over the past 3 years, I've encountered my fair share of issues in the field. Everything from ID-10-T* errors, weather, equipment issues, or a combination thereof. More often than not, is was a combination of 2 or more of those, with my dumb-assery being a an active contributor.

As I got more experienced, the ID-10-T errors decreased significantly. I still have my occasional moments of utter dumb-assery, but for the most part, I'm now fairly well organized and know my gear quite well. I'm basically hauling around a mobile field observatory and set it up and tear it down in the dark without issue. And of course, knowing how to operate it all properly plays a large part in having successful imaging sessions.

Now, that's not to say I didn't have any good sessions. I've had many where things have gone very well and I got rather nice images. As I progress, my successful images greatly outnumber my unsuccessful ones. But I've had very of those days where everything just turned out to be absolutely perfect as if the stars had lined up just for me. This past weekend was such a weekend.

On Friday night, my friend Adam Correia, a brilliant photographer, messaged me asking if I wanted to go out to do some night shooting. The conditions were questionable, but the weather forecast and clear sky charts seemed to say that clear skies would show up around 11 PM. So we headed out to the Foley Mountain Conservation Area in Westport, Ontario. The mountain overlooks this scenic little town on the Rideau Canal and a nice lookout spot offers a clear view of the lake, canal and overall landscape. I'm sure thousands of pictures had been taken from that spot over the years, but we were out to do something different.

My "big project" for the evening was to make a time lapse sequence. I set up my D5100 and its intervalometer and set out out to shooting the horizon. The first 2 sequences of clouds I shot were on a static tripod, but the 3rd sequence I shot using my iOptron SkyTracker with 1/2 speed mode so that the sky and land would move at different rates.

Overall, this project turned into a great success. The motion of the clouds through the sky was dynamic and hypnotic when backed by bright moon light. And finally in the last sequence when the clouds had parted, the Milky Way gracefully swept through the sky over the glow of the town. Mission success!


While my D5100 was running in auto pilot, I had my D7000 on another tripod shooting the landscape and Milky Way. Most of my pics looked great, but I didn't find many of them terribly appealing, But I did have a few notable ones that turned out quite well.



Westport, Ontario
Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/crunchmeister/20795744435/in/dateposted-public/

Westport, Ontario
Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/crunchmeister/20769508206/in/dateposted-public/

6 panel panorama of the Milky Way above Westport, Ontario
Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/crunchmeister/20769508206/in/dateposted-public/

And I would be remiss if I didn't mention Adam's phenominal image! His images are always astounding, and he got several great ones that night. But this one in particular is absolutely amazing and I would feel I was doing our perfect evening an injustice if I wasn't going to share it here (with his permission, of course)

Facebook link: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10156485460790355&set=a.10150289194090355.509692.569505354&type=1&theater

So the evening turned out perfect. Perfect conditions, no humidity, no bugs, and the scenery and skies were perfect!

On Saturday, I took a solo trip out to the Lennox and Addington Dark Sky Viewing Area in Erinsville, Ontario. I've wrote about this place often, and with good reason. I'm a regular user of the site and pretty much all my best deep sky images were taken from there.  Whenever the weather is clear and I have nothing more pressing, I'm out there capturing the night sky.

The last couple of times I was out there, I travelled light with only my cameras, tripods and lenses. This time, I decided to haul out my scope again to do some more serious deep sky imaging. I didn't really have any particular target in mind. I figured I'd pick something once I got there.

Upon arrival, the sky was rather hazy. After setting up, I took some images of the moon with my scope and ZWO ASI120MC-S camera. I didn't really expect much from them, and was right to assume that. They were ok, but nothing worthwhile publishing. They actually turned out better than I expected, but still not great. Nonetheless, was worthwhile playing with anyway since I haven't had much opportunity to use this camera since I got it some weeks ago.

Shortly before the moon set completely, the clouds vanished. I removed the ASI120 from the imaging scope, slid it into the guide scope, and attached my Nikon D5100 to the telescope. At this point, I had been pointing out M31 The Andromeda Galaxy to people for several minutes. So I thought it would be fun to try to take some high res images of it with my "big" scope. I have a lot of images of M31, but most taken with my camera with a 300mm lens or 120mm refractor. It was time to step up my game.

Now to backtrack a bit; I had attempted a core shot of M31 last fall before I got my auto guider. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to do any more than 2 minute exposures without significant star trailing. Even after collecting almost 40 minutes (before clouds moved in), I only had 8 usable shots that made it into the final stack. Overall, the results wasn't terrible, as can be seen in the photo below, but I REALLY needed a mulligan on this one. I knew I could do much better, especially now that I was armed with an auto guider. I would be able to do longer exposures!

Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/crunchmeister/15251305780/in/dateposted-public/

So I punched it into my Celestron handset. The scope stopped, and I did a test exposure at max ISO for 5 seconds to check my framing. PERFECT! I couldn't have asked for a better position or composition! Not only was the core and most of  M31 perfectly positioned, but M32 and M110 were both in frame too, something I didn't manage on my last image. Even at f/6.3, I can't fit all of M31 into my field of view, but this looked really good. It was time to shoot.

Once I had PHD up and running and guiding properly, I started off with a test exposure of 2 minutes at ISO 1600 to test my tracking. It was spot on, so I upped it to a 5 minute exposure. The resulting image was very nice. The core was slightly blown out, but the details in the spiral arms and dust lanes was quite stunning. So I figured I'd do a 10 minute exposure to see how that turned out. I had never done an exposure longer than 5 minutes before, so I was curious. And since the tracking was so perfect, I wanted to see how it held out.

Well, I was NOT disappointed. As soon as it appeared on the screen, I was utterly speechless (a rarity for me). The fine details popped out. The outer edges of the galaxy were well defined. And I could see the nebulous dust clouds surrounding the galaxy. And most importantly, the focus was dead on and stars were perfect pinpoints. I was impressed! The core was utterly blown out, but that's to be expected. It was the fine outer detail I was after. I knew I would have to do multiple exposure lengths to get the different parts of the galaxy balanced out without blowing out the core and its surrounding regions anyway. 

So I entered a shooting plan into Backyard Nikon as follows:


  • 10 x 1 minute exposures for the central part of the core
  • 15 x 2 minute exposures for the inner dust lanes surrounding the core
  • 12 x 5 minute exposures for the arms and main dust lanes
  • 4 x 10 minute exposures for the outer part of the arms and nebulosity
At the end of the session, I shot a series of dark frames matching the exposure lengths for stacking. 

Out of 2H 20M of data, 1H 54M turned out to be high scoring and had pinpoint stars. I lost one of my 10 minute exposures which had some trailing, but overall, I had plenty of great data, and I couldn't wait to stack it the following day.

And this is the result. I did a multi-group stack in DeepSkyStacker. The resulting image was just mind-blowing. Even without making any adjustments, the image on my screen was orders of magnitude better than anything I'd ever captured before. And I was actually seeing the rusty colour of the dust lanes, the yellowish glow from the core, and the blueish haze in the spiral arms. This was unlike anything I had done before.

So I exported the image into Photoshop and started playing with it. After several post-processing attempts that didn't look right, I realized that the data I had was so good that I didn't really need to do much histogram stretching at all. I had been going too hard on all my adjustments. So I started over again, this time skipping most of the steps in my normal DSO post-processing workflow and being far more subtle in the rest of my adjustments. I did some contrast enhancement, a bit of localized sharpening, light colour enhancement, and finally some noise reduction. I did very little to this image compared to my usual post-processing techniques. And this is the final version, which I'm absolutely ecstatic over! I think this will be my defining image for 2015.


Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/crunchmeister/20829379825/in/datetaken/

Now while my scope was busy capturing M31, I was busy shooting the sky with my D7000, I popped on my Vivitar 13mm f/2.8 lens and started shooting the Milky Way. We're definitely past prime time on the Milky Way, but it's still a wonderful sight. Several of my pics turned out great, but were rather plain and generic looking. So I decided I'd try something totally different. 

Levering the flexibility of my new Manfrotto 055 Pro tripod (highly recommended to me by Adam), I set it up so that the camera was basically 4" off the ground. I got near the ancient, 2 billion year old stones that surround the concrete pad at the Dark Sky Viewing Area, and snapped off a pic of the Milky Way that showed much more foreground than I normally get when I'm there. And I have to say, the resulting image was quite impressive!

Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/crunchmeister/20634713338/in/dateposted-public/

But the REAL surprise that night was an unexpected showing of the Aurora Borealis! I had captured a bit of aurora the previous week when it was at a Kp 5.6 level, which is pretty much the minimum for it to normally be visible from my area. It was cool to capture some aurora, but it wasn't a very memorable display by any means.  The image wasn't bad at all, especially considering the low index. 

Flickr link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/crunchmeister/20009659203/in/datetaken/

What really surprised me about this time was that I had been keeping an eye on the aurora forecast. It hadn't broken a Kp 4 all day, and was at a Kp 3.6. But there was the aurora dancing away on the horizon even brighter than the previous week. I took a test exposure to ensure it was indeed the aurora, and it indeed was. So I quickly set up my intervalometer and shot a series of images that I put together into this time lapse.




It turned out to be a spectacular display of the likes that I hadn't seen in years. And I finally managed to capture my first good time lapse of it!

So all in all. I would say this was about as perfect a weekend of photography as I could get. Many great shots and one evening spent with a good friend I don't get to see very often. One can't ask for much better than that!

So until next time, clear skies, and keep looking up!



* ID-10-T Error: (pronounced I DEE ten TEE) is a computer tech inside joke meaning IDIOT, referring to the error being caused by the user, not a hardware or software problem.