Another first try at Milky Way ...

Discussion in 'Astrophotography' started by popcan, Jun 8, 2016.

  1. popcan

    popcan Mu-43 Regular

    Aug 3, 2013
    Hi all, I watch with interest the threads about first attempts at astrophotography! Decided I would add my first attempt as well. It's a learning process for sure, so much to remember!
    I was pretty pleased with the result, considering I barely know what I'm doing, but I know there's a looong way to go.
    One question I have is, how are people getting the depth of colour in the Milky Way; the reds and other colours in the dust clouds etc? What is the proper colour for the sky?As usual, any thoughts / criticisms welcome!

    Olympus OMD EM-5, Pan 7-14 f4, 2.5 minutes ISO 1600, Ioptron tracker.
    Foreground added
    MW blog 9.
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2016
    • Like Like x 11
  2. Tenpenny

    Tenpenny Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 16, 2015
    Nampa, Idaho
    Real Name:
    Brent Watkins
    I'm learning also. On my last attempt I had the opposite problem, I couldn't bring out much blue lol. I suspect it involves finding the correct temp. balance. I haven't quite figured it out yet myself. I did see a trick on youtube, in which, you crank up vibrance and saturation then slide the temp between yellow-blue until there are about equal amounts of orangeish/bluish in the sky... then pull back down the vib-ration to where you desire. (I still struggle with going to far on vibrance and saturation) I'm also curious what the correct color should be.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. popcan

    popcan Mu-43 Regular

    Aug 3, 2013
    Some people say black, others say more blue.... but either choice seems to be at the expense of something else....
    I'll try your trick above, thanks!
  4. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    The deep sky should not be blue in the middle of the night. If you lift the exposure towards the top where there are very few stars the background areas should look grey overall, not tinted. You could use an eye dropper on these areas to try and set the rough WB, then fine tune.

    Most stars should be blueish-white. Some should be yellow-red. There are well known ones in obvious constellations that you could check.

    There is one source of confusion - the bottom of the frame towards the horizon will often have a different colour balance due to light pollution. That might be why your shot looks a bit green at the bottom while the rest of it is very blue. You'll have to use a graduated WB adjustment to try and compensate for this, adjust the global WB for the part of the sky with the least light pollution contamination.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. popcan

    popcan Mu-43 Regular

    Aug 3, 2013
    2nd try, blended three pics.

    I tried to get the sky to be more grey this time, as suggested. I think I need less separation between the mountains and the sky, but couldn't seem to get the gradient to do it.
    More fiddling to be done. If nothing else, it's fun!

    reflect test green lake copy.
    • Like Like x 3
  6. mzzyhmd

    mzzyhmd Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 3, 2015
    Real Name:
    So ioptron tracker would let you shoot at a longer shutter speed without getting any star trail? Then why spending $$ on fast Astro glasses?

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  7. popcan

    popcan Mu-43 Regular

    Aug 3, 2013
    If you mean me, I haven't bought any fast glass for this project. I used my Panasonic 7-14 f4.0.
  8. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    If you want to take a shot where the foreground cuts into the milky way substantially. Also some cameras have poor long exposure noise build-up.

    Trackers cost as much as a decent prime lens anyway. With trackers you have to do proper polar alignment which is a PITA in the southern hemisphere... they're also not much use for anything else, whereas a nice fast lens...
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2016