You've got to check this photo out. I'm in awe of the photographer. He somehow managed to avoid star trails yet did a long exposure.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080929.html
Win
Printable View
You've got to check this photo out. I'm in awe of the photographer. He somehow managed to avoid star trails yet did a long exposure.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080929.html
Win
Hmmmm......I don't believe it.
This certainly doesn't look genuine to me. I don't have any experience photographing the Milky Way, but my estimation is that it would typically take many minutes to several hours to get that much detail.
I'll take it back if someone can prove me wrong.
Did you guys read the description below the photo? It explains how it was made, using a long duration exposure. A bright moon illuminated the foreground. It's legit.
Still don't buy it.Quote:
Originally Posted by scoutabout
Pretty though.
On extremely rare nights, I've been able to photograph the milky way using ISO 1600, f2.8, and 30 sec exposures with a fisheye. It is possible to avoid startrails at that speed.
For reference, here is one I took in Escalante.
http://danransom.com/blog/images/200...4_milkyway.jpg
However, Wally's picture does look completely fake, and I don't buy it. I have a hard time believing you could image the milky way when there is that much moonlight out... Plus, it just looks really bizarre, the transitions between the sky and foreground look horrible. And, he said he used a flashlight to light the interior of the cave. A light as small as a flashlight would cast very distinct shadow edges. Only a big light source can cast very smooth shadow edges. I can't see how that alcove was lit by a flaslight. The light in the cave, according to the shadows, appears to be coming from outside the cave. Where exactly was his flashlight? Looks more like it is coming from the sky.
Also, if you've ever been to false kiva, you know that you shouldn't step into the back of the cave, because it is a cultural resource. He is clearly standing inside the part of the cave that still has structures in it, where there are signs that say not to enter. (this may have changed?) Note the rocks on the right that appear to make a wall, which he is clearly behind... He also claims the hike out there is difficult. It is like a 20 minute walk, and not a difficult one at that. And lions? Come on Wally... The odds of a lion attacking you in the Utah desert are virtually nil.
Here is his original website where this was posted:
http://www.twanight.org/newTWAN/photos.asp?ID=3001638
This quote for me seals the deal... He doesn't actually say it was only one image. He says nothing about how the image of the sky was made...
Quote:
During the exposure for this image the crescent Moon lit up the canyons and I artificially lit the inside of the cave. If the photo looks unreal, believe me that place looks like the most unreal scene time wrapped place I have ever been to. I have gotten unbelievably spooked at times being in there alone at night while I was just waiting for a mountain lion to return to its den!"
Nice shot Carpey.
I love that shot! How many exposures in it? HDR?Quote:
Originally Posted by CarpeyBiggs
Thanks Hank. One exposure, with the help of Doug Noel providing light to Chimney Rock. No HDR, but there is plenty of contrast enhancement in the sky.Quote:
Originally Posted by hank moon
Wow - nice work. :2thumbs:Quote:
Originally Posted by CarpeyBiggs
Dan, that photo of yours is one of my favorites.
Win
2nd that one :nod:Quote:
Originally Posted by Win
count me in.... WOW!Quote:
Originally Posted by JP
that photo speaks to the soul in a way i cant explain
Wow Dan! That picture is just amazing!Quote:
Originally Posted by CarpeyBiggs
Here is what Wally has to say about his photo
I am simply an amateur astronomer that loves the night sky and has a passion for recording the night sky as it really is from interesting settings like national parks and landmarks that folk are familar with. I have been doing this now for 44 years and in that time not only have I learnt a few things but I have seen tremendous advances in technology that enable folk to take photographs of the stars as pin points in seconds rather than minutes like in the old days.
My night sky/landscape photographs which are my trademark have traditionally always been single frame shots of both the night sky and landmarks in one single exposure. In the olden days like for comet hale-bopp, the longer time exposures with tracked camera to follow the stars would always leave a tell tail sign on the landscape rocks as they would blur if lit or they would cast a shadow against the background stars if you lit them momentarily like with a flash. Now a days, all is different. Anybody with a decent digital camera like canon 20D and 24mm lens with high iso like 1600 at f/1.6 can record deep detail in the Milky Way in just 20 seconds and 10 times more stars than the eye can see. So now it is an easy matter to capture stars frozen as points of light and the foreground in sharp focus with no movement even when focued on infiniti with the right lens. Folk that are saying there must be star trails or ground movement in a shot like the False Kiva shot are very accurate in their accessment for eguipment and technology that is several years old, but they are sadly lacking in what can be done today with some of the more basic DSLR cameras that are available at the local costco store.
How False Kiva was taken:
Been to False Kiva (1200 mile plus round trip) 4 previous times, all photographic failures, hiked the 2 mile trail with last part down a very steep canyon wall trail, hiked out in dark and got lost each and every time. It's dark out there.
Canon 5D, iso 1600 Raw, f/2.5, 25 second exposue with camera on a stationary tripod (no tracking). The cave is huge, so the 24 mm lens required me to take 4 separate (camera veritical) shots shooting one shot at 25 seconds and then moving the camera horizontally for the next shot and so on until I got the entire cave. Each shot was a sky/landscape shot and I had a professional lab sticth the photos together with a panoramic blending software to make it one continous horizontal shot as I am a photoshop moron.
The lighting was from 4 sources (which I learnt from my 4 previous failed attempts - after all one can drive 1200 miles to take a single shot only so many times). The stars/Milky Way of course provided their own light for the sky, the trip was planned for a small cresent moon to be setting in the west to light up the left and center canyon walls, and a large flashlight was positioned out side the cave on the left to bounce light off a flat rock to hit the right canyon wall with some faint light. Inside the cave, I used a series of flashlights and or strokes to bounce light off the far left/right walls to evenly light the cave (there was no direct lighting). There was absolutely no superimposing of any portion in this image or any other image I have ever done. To me that's important as my whole purpose is to show folk what the sky really is like from different landmarks in this great country of ours. As for the questioning about why no haze is seen next to the horizon in the sky yet is seem in the far canyon hills then my guess would be that those saying such are thinking of a day shot. This is a night shot - everything is dark. It rained that day heavily so there was no haze. It is the cresent moon that is lighitng up the close canyon walls and they are sharp, but the farther you go down you run into moonshadow that is not haze but simply darkness where the camera can not record detail so it looks like haze. The same for the far canyon walls look like they are covered with haze, but it is just because they are so far, the slight moonlight does not bounce back enought light from those far canyons for the camera to see any detail (you folk are calling that haze), yet the stars which have their own light of course show thru the haze which is not there (but only in folks minds) and hits the camera sensors full on.
I have been around long enough to know that no matter what explaination I give as to how real a photograph I took is, there are always the arm chair folk that would rather critizise others than do anything themselves. If you don't believe what I say (everything here is testable) and then believe the great body of work I have done over the years that is clearly recognized by experts in the field of astronomy/photography. This is my 29th APOD. Those folk are not dummies. I might be able to fool the APOD folk one time, but 29 times???? How about TIME-LIFE photo editors. They picked my Hale-Bopp pic as Pic of year in 1997 - out of millions submitted. They also picked my Mars Closest encounter in 50,000 years as Pic of year in 2003 for both LIFE magazine and a different image for TIME magazine, again out of millions submitted. My night sky work sells in over 30 national parks, where each park goes thru an intrepretive review process to determine that the photos are genuine - none have been turned down. NASA still has my Hale-Bopp shot on their front Hale-Bopp web page, etc....
For those of you who can, just enjoy the photograph and for others that can't do that then simply take one that we all can enjoy.
We live in a great country with so much to see and photograph. There is much that is untouched waiting for us to capture.
May you enjoy the process.
All the best.
Wally
An amateur astronomer - my greatest honor