@TheLostxxxsoul the shutter on the camera remains open for 30 seconds in order to capture a lot of light. That's called "an exposure" -- each frame of the film is exposed for 30 seconds.
When I'm using 30 seconds long exposure I get star trails on my photos. I heard that 20 sec is the longest recommended. Are you editing the photos after or is it just not visible when making a time-lapse?
@tobbler0ne it has everything to do with focal length: the longer the lens, the less time it takes for the appearance (perception) of blur as celestial objects move across the sky. If you use a 200mm lens on the moon, it'll begin to blur after 3-5 seconds. If you use a very wide angle lens (as I do in my time-lapse), you can often go up to about a minute before any "appearance" of motion blur.
@argv01 Thank you for your answer. I used a basic 55mm lens so i guess that answers it. Going to save up for a more appropriate lens then as I'm really getting in to this kind of photography.
Very nice argv01. I have a tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 as well and I will try some timelapse. A few questions for you. Which direction of the sky should I be pointing to ensure that I don't miss the Milky Way in October? I plan to use two LP-E8 batteries for my T2i for shooting the timelaspse at your settings. How many hours of coverage will I get? Will the batteries or camera sensor get overheating? I will be using an external interval timer for this.
@YouFirstEye I have no information on specific camera equipment, so I can't begin to guess about your setup. As for sky direction, I never know myself what I will see. I wait till I'm outside and I look up. It's not something that needs to be planned.
@YouFirstEye I use a free program called stellarium. You can put in your location and it will show you what you will be able to see in the sky. I'm fairly positive the center of the milky way is too low on the horizon in the northern hemisphere to be seen during winter however.
i guarentee if you were there , it wouldnt look anything like that...all thse time lapse milky way vids have all these comments about how you wish you didnt have pollution so you could see that...well you wouldnt see it there either.. it looks like separate layers have been filmed and combined to make these
@longfootbuddy I reply to virtually everyone that the photos are over-exposed to yield this effect. they are not layers. The entire process is explained in the notes for the video (no one seems to ever read them), and a complete tutorial is give on my star trails page: danheller com slash star-trails
I'm so glad to have a dark sky at home. I've spent many a night laying back staring up at the Milky Way and countless surrounding stars, just thinking 'some day, some how'. I have been inspired from the age of 15 (I'm now 16) to look forward to what the night brings, and being able to watch our 200-million year orbit around the core of our galaxy with the naked eye is so amazing, it has the power to bring tears to my eyes.
Seeing the milkyway from a perfectly darkspot is one of my dreams. Tried a timelapse of milkyway lastnight which isn't anything compared to this... :(
im just about to try this.. Im in Australia on the gold coast hinterlands.. Im just waiting for the moon to dissapear. Its freezing outside so im worried about battery power but there isnt a cloud in the sky! wish me luck!!!
Very nice indeed. For each of these images how much post-processing have you done? Like I imagine you may have batch processed these in Photoshop with some leveling and/or other tweaks? Certainly my own attempts have started 'ok' but required photoshop to bring the milky way out properly, I'd be very happy to get a single image like this!
@flitemedia if you read through the comments and questions people asked, you'll see long explanations. You can also visit danheller . com slash star-trails for technical hints
@SuperMarioZee lol yea its faked by nasa to make ppl think we live in a galaxy ;) Seriously: city light pollution destroys the night sky, drive out somewhere well away from built-up areas, switch all lights off and let your eyes adapt for a few minutes; the night sky will be unlike anything you have seen before. Beautiful timelapse btw :)
I have a Nikon D700 with a 50mm f1.4 Lens and a 16-35mm f2.8 lens, which one would be better for taking pictures like this? And how do you focus on the sky?
@dracojah I have no comments about specific cameras. However, you need to have an f2.8 for 30 seconds, and that tends to require an ISO of at least 1600 or 3200. As for focusing, you only need to focus on something "far enough" away that it therefore captures the sky. The shorter your lens (16mm), the easier that is. the longer (35mm), the harder that is. To understand this, learn about "depth of field" concepts.... easy stuff, but not here on a youtube comment.
@dracojah Your lenses have an infinity symbol (sideways 8) usually with a line that points down. Match up that line with your focus line on the lens ring.
@dracojah On your focus ring, you are going to have an infinity symbol ( sideways 8) with a line going down. Match this line with the line on the ring
Really inspired me to go and try this! I have a Nikon D40- which is better than a standard non DSLR digital camera but not exactly 'high end' I suppose. I doubt it'll be as clear as yours but I will say anything near would be marvellous! Thank you so much for posting this!
@naomislittleworld I use a D50 - the advantage argv01 has is the wide angle lens which lets in a lot of light (F2.8) compared to our standard lenses, also the very high ISO number (3200), and a location well away from light pollution. Why not try a star trail? Zoom in, focus on a bright star, zoom back out and leave the camera exposing for up to 30mins (high ISO, min F-stop, as far from city lights as you can get). Switch NR off or it will do 30mins of that too. Easy :)
@supahsnuffy (uploader) it doesn't look exactly like this to the naked eye. I set the camera to over-expose the images to enhance the effect. So, while you do "see" it, it just looks more impressive in this format.
@supahsnuffy I don't know your camera model. The best thing to do is just try it. If your camera's ISO doesn't go up to 1600 and your lens aperture doesn't open up to at least f2.8 and your shutter speed doesn't go as long as 30 seconds, you're not likely to get it.
Great video is there any chance you could send me one or two of those pictures they are simply amazing and i have never seen such great shots in my life!
You can see it anywhere, just not in real time with the naked eye. Long exposures are needed to reveal the dimmer stars so you truly see the arm of the milky way :D
I have only seen the milky way once in my life.....one and a half month ago. It was under moderately light polluted skies a mile or two from our town. It looked amazing to me, even though it looked like a very faint band of milkiness in the sky, an average person would've been highly unimpressed on the otherhand.
On an 8 x 10 enlargement, is the noise noticable or distracting? Is this how the producers on Survivor get those great looking timelapse shots of the milky way?
I don't watch Survivor, so I have no way to guess. However, to get this kind of exposure, you need at least 30 seconds per frame @ f2.8 at ISO 1600-3200. I don't know of any video camera that can do that, but then, I don't know video equipment. (The Redone won't, and I think that's the highest-end camera available.)
So, chances are, they're using the same technique I am, using a high-end dSLR. As for the noise, I've enlarged to 40x60" and it looks stunning.
sorry if I do this whit a fisheye of 28mm at 2,8 f is it ok or I need a 16mm? and I cant impost iso...its automatic(because I have a CCD) so...you have an electrick mount which rotate the camera??
you're way over-thinking this. use whatever lens you want, and accept whatever ISO setting your camera chooses, provided that you "like" the results you see in the preview frame. (That is, take a single shot, look at it, and make exposure adjustments as necessary to fit your desired goal.) Once you have your settings, start shooting the frame sequences, either by using an automated timer, or doing it manually.
When doing time-lapse videos, the EARTH is your motorized mount. It's the thing that's moving--carrying your camera along with it. That's why the stars appear to move. All you need is a tripod.
I don't think you're getting the concept here. It's not 30 frames-per-second. It's 30 seconds PER FRAME. You can't do with this a video camera. You use a regular still camera and shoot individual photos.
You're right--that's why you need a camera with very high ISO settings and a lens with a very wide aperture (f2.8). I usually use ISO3200, but sometimes 6400. These are currently available in high-end consumer digital cameras, and will probably be more common in 2010 and beyond.
i have bought a CCD for my telescope and now I want to use it with a 28wich is a fisheye of my fathers old camera(Canon AT-1).this CCD is for the sky but you can set only the time,max 60min Min 1/10000 sec and you can also set the fps Min 3,75Max 60wich are importants for detailes,but you cant set the ISO so If I want to photograph the Milky way I have to take for example 10 photograph andstack them to compare with your results.
i live in Perth Australia and i cant see the milky way from there because too much light pollution, but just wondering if i go away from the city, with the naked eye, will the sight of the milky way be as beautiful and colorful as the one in this video? thanks!
these photos are over-exposed by two stops, which means that the camera is picking up detail your eye can't see. Since you never know what the camera sees till you try, you might as well go anywhere that at least "appears" dark, and start shooting. Granted, you need a camera that can at least go to 30 seconds at ISO 3200 at f2.8. Not many consumer cameras can do that....yet.
you could do that with a slow crawling vehicle with a laid path cruising at the speed of the rotation of the earth heading away from the sunrise with the camera computer controlled locked and following a sector.
GR8T VIDEO!! Can i know what are your shutter speed, len size, ISO settings please? Did you use a variety of settings or just one settings and also how many image per hour per shutter speed?I have a 40d canon :)
I used to make videos of epic natural phenomena like you once, then I took an arrow in the knee.
JohnnysaidWhat 2 months ago
time elapse is 200 night photography picture?
editnelson 2 months ago
Very nice!
heliosvoltaic 4 months ago
at 0:17, i saw some thing fly very fast, not sure weather if its a shooting star cuz its burning red
eilselyiu8 6 months ago
Way Cool!
usetobefast 7 months ago
Look. No dislikes!
TheAnaRayAna 9 months ago
this is what you see in Oregon...
phraedusthamusicdigr 11 months ago
Coolist video ever!
borg386 11 months ago
what do you mean bu each exposure is 30 seconds long
TheLostxxxsoul 1 year ago
@TheLostxxxsoul the shutter on the camera remains open for 30 seconds in order to capture a lot of light. That's called "an exposure" -- each frame of the film is exposed for 30 seconds.
argv01 1 year ago 2
@TheLostxxxsoul - you are too young to know. You only know about digital stuff! Did u hear the word shutter speed?
candon1972 3 months ago
very nice work!
jamieball 1 year ago
were can i get a time elapsed camera because i would love to use this for science class.
thegeckoproduction 1 year ago
@thegeckoproduction not a time lapse camera. just pro level camera and taking a lot of pictures and putting them together
dsmrocker 1 year ago
When I'm using 30 seconds long exposure I get star trails on my photos. I heard that 20 sec is the longest recommended. Are you editing the photos after or is it just not visible when making a time-lapse?
tobbler0ne 1 year ago
@tobbler0ne it has everything to do with focal length: the longer the lens, the less time it takes for the appearance (perception) of blur as celestial objects move across the sky. If you use a 200mm lens on the moon, it'll begin to blur after 3-5 seconds. If you use a very wide angle lens (as I do in my time-lapse), you can often go up to about a minute before any "appearance" of motion blur.
argv01 1 year ago
@argv01 Thank you for your answer. I used a basic 55mm lens so i guess that answers it. Going to save up for a more appropriate lens then as I'm really getting in to this kind of photography.
tobbler0ne 1 year ago
@argv01 Wow! I did not know that! Thanks for the inspiration and tips :)
stardustmel81 1 year ago
amazing lol
mantocska 1 year ago
Very nice argv01. I have a tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 as well and I will try some timelapse. A few questions for you. Which direction of the sky should I be pointing to ensure that I don't miss the Milky Way in October? I plan to use two LP-E8 batteries for my T2i for shooting the timelaspse at your settings. How many hours of coverage will I get? Will the batteries or camera sensor get overheating? I will be using an external interval timer for this.
YouFirstEye 1 year ago
@YouFirstEye I have no information on specific camera equipment, so I can't begin to guess about your setup. As for sky direction, I never know myself what I will see. I wait till I'm outside and I look up. It's not something that needs to be planned.
argv01 1 year ago
@YouFirstEye I use a free program called stellarium. You can put in your location and it will show you what you will be able to see in the sky. I'm fairly positive the center of the milky way is too low on the horizon in the northern hemisphere to be seen during winter however.
aguscapo 1 year ago
i guarentee if you were there , it wouldnt look anything like that...all thse time lapse milky way vids have all these comments about how you wish you didnt have pollution so you could see that...well you wouldnt see it there either.. it looks like separate layers have been filmed and combined to make these
longfootbuddy 1 year ago
@longfootbuddy I reply to virtually everyone that the photos are over-exposed to yield this effect. they are not layers. The entire process is explained in the notes for the video (no one seems to ever read them), and a complete tutorial is give on my star trails page: danheller com slash star-trails
argv01 1 year ago
wait so you can actually see this with your bare eyes? somewhere very dark?!?! uuggh, i hate living in the city sometimes
Alxe73191 1 year ago
So jelous! very nice sky guys!!!
Valdris1987 1 year ago
I'm so glad to have a dark sky at home. I've spent many a night laying back staring up at the Milky Way and countless surrounding stars, just thinking 'some day, some how'. I have been inspired from the age of 15 (I'm now 16) to look forward to what the night brings, and being able to watch our 200-million year orbit around the core of our galaxy with the naked eye is so amazing, it has the power to bring tears to my eyes.
george7378 1 year ago
Seeing the milkyway from a perfectly darkspot is one of my dreams. Tried a timelapse of milkyway lastnight which isn't anything compared to this... :(
ranaadnanm 1 year ago
would i see the milky way in such detail with the naked eye if i was standing there?
focista6 1 year ago
@focista6 yep
southlandMario 1 year ago
im just about to try this.. Im in Australia on the gold coast hinterlands.. Im just waiting for the moon to dissapear. Its freezing outside so im worried about battery power but there isnt a cloud in the sky! wish me luck!!!
missychop 1 year ago
Omg. If I EVER have a powerfull telescope with me when im looking at the Milky Way, I'd go LOCO. I'd literally stay up ALL night.
FateMan22 1 year ago
Very nice indeed. For each of these images how much post-processing have you done? Like I imagine you may have batch processed these in Photoshop with some leveling and/or other tweaks? Certainly my own attempts have started 'ok' but required photoshop to bring the milky way out properly, I'd be very happy to get a single image like this!
flitemedia 1 year ago
@flitemedia if you read through the comments and questions people asked, you'll see long explanations. You can also visit danheller . com slash star-trails for technical hints
argv01 1 year ago
@SuperMarioZee lol yea its faked by nasa to make ppl think we live in a galaxy ;) Seriously: city light pollution destroys the night sky, drive out somewhere well away from built-up areas, switch all lights off and let your eyes adapt for a few minutes; the night sky will be unlike anything you have seen before. Beautiful timelapse btw :)
flitemedia 1 year ago
I have a Nikon D700 with a 50mm f1.4 Lens and a 16-35mm f2.8 lens, which one would be better for taking pictures like this? And how do you focus on the sky?
dracojah 1 year ago
@dracojah I have no comments about specific cameras. However, you need to have an f2.8 for 30 seconds, and that tends to require an ISO of at least 1600 or 3200. As for focusing, you only need to focus on something "far enough" away that it therefore captures the sky. The shorter your lens (16mm), the easier that is. the longer (35mm), the harder that is. To understand this, learn about "depth of field" concepts.... easy stuff, but not here on a youtube comment.
argv01 1 year ago
@dracojah Your lenses have an infinity symbol (sideways 8) usually with a line that points down. Match up that line with your focus line on the lens ring.
DouglasD90 1 year ago
@dracojah On your focus ring, you are going to have an infinity symbol ( sideways 8) with a line going down. Match this line with the line on the ring
DouglasD90 1 year ago
Is that even real? The trees look fake. And I've never seen that many stars up in the sky.
SuperMarioZee 1 year ago
Really inspired me to go and try this! I have a Nikon D40- which is better than a standard non DSLR digital camera but not exactly 'high end' I suppose. I doubt it'll be as clear as yours but I will say anything near would be marvellous! Thank you so much for posting this!
naomislittleworld 1 year ago
@naomislittleworld I use a D50 - the advantage argv01 has is the wide angle lens which lets in a lot of light (F2.8) compared to our standard lenses, also the very high ISO number (3200), and a location well away from light pollution. Why not try a star trail? Zoom in, focus on a bright star, zoom back out and leave the camera exposing for up to 30mins (high ISO, min F-stop, as far from city lights as you can get). Switch NR off or it will do 30mins of that too. Easy :)
flitemedia 1 year ago
Can this be seen with the naked eye?
Yanco888 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
made my first video about galaxies. the name is : galaxies in the universe galaxy movie
Thanks to alatafelis, i got nice music too
2012TheAndromeda 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i made my first video about galaxies. the name is : galaxies in the universe galaxy movie
Thanks to alatafelis, i got nice music too
2012TheAndromeda 1 year ago
WOW!
session036 1 year ago
Is this visible to the naked eye? How is it visible? I'm desperate to see this in some shape or form for myself...
supahsnuffy 1 year ago
@supahsnuffy (uploader) it doesn't look exactly like this to the naked eye. I set the camera to over-expose the images to enhance the effect. So, while you do "see" it, it just looks more impressive in this format.
argv01 1 year ago
@argv01 Hm, Would I be able to get a similar effect with an olympus SLR camera? E-410...my dad knows the most about it, haha, but I want to learn~
supahsnuffy 1 year ago
@supahsnuffy I don't know your camera model. The best thing to do is just try it. If your camera's ISO doesn't go up to 1600 and your lens aperture doesn't open up to at least f2.8 and your shutter speed doesn't go as long as 30 seconds, you're not likely to get it.
argv01 1 year ago
@argv01 how about Canon 350d?
Could you tell me more about technical side?
b4kus 1 year ago
fucking beautiful i need to go here at least once
TEXASMADExxxx 1 year ago
Beautiful......
stickcreator01 1 year ago
I really love this!
leomarquelira 1 year ago
oh..i have always wanted to see this with my own eyes
brogaguy 2 years ago
Great video is there any chance you could send me one or two of those pictures they are simply amazing and i have never seen such great shots in my life!
tanmyman777 2 years ago
Simply beautiful! I wish i could get shots like this!
FrostyVoiceActors 2 years ago
What a VIEW!!!!!!!!
mbofny 2 years ago
thats insane. i hope to see the night sky like this at least a few times in my life.
circa73skater 2 years ago
@circa73skater
You can see it anywhere, just not in real time with the naked eye. Long exposures are needed to reveal the dimmer stars so you truly see the arm of the milky way :D
thejordan01 2 years ago
where is this
2012TheAndromeda 2 years ago
unfortunately i live where i can only view this a few ocations each year, the rest of the time my sky is facing the void outside the galaxy :D
enkopingsbo 2 years ago
I have only seen the milky way once in my life.....one and a half month ago. It was under moderately light polluted skies a mile or two from our town. It looked amazing to me, even though it looked like a very faint band of milkiness in the sky, an average person would've been highly unimpressed on the otherhand.
ranaadnanm 2 years ago
On an 8 x 10 enlargement, is the noise noticable or distracting? Is this how the producers on Survivor get those great looking timelapse shots of the milky way?
tessalia87 2 years ago
I don't watch Survivor, so I have no way to guess. However, to get this kind of exposure, you need at least 30 seconds per frame @ f2.8 at ISO 1600-3200. I don't know of any video camera that can do that, but then, I don't know video equipment. (The Redone won't, and I think that's the highest-end camera available.)
So, chances are, they're using the same technique I am, using a high-end dSLR. As for the noise, I've enlarged to 40x60" and it looks stunning.
argv01 2 years ago
About the noise, thats because you've got the best camera I know of. Actually Mark IV is out anyday now....wonder what that would be like.
ranaadnanm 2 years ago
Did you stitch many exposures together to create 1 image for the video ? Great visibility.
NorthenLlght1 2 years ago
wow so beautiful, really puts into perspective how small we really are in comparison to everything and how amazing our universe really is
Demonact1337 2 years ago
amen to that(:
apeanutforlife 2 years ago
what a sight
fuckingjackass 2 years ago
fantastic
delioglou 2 years ago
Super. Thanks.
xavier1850 2 years ago
Beautiful Wow
laurelglenn 2 years ago
Gorgeous
ANONONJEWTUBE 2 years ago
sorry if I do this whit a fisheye of 28mm at 2,8 f is it ok or I need a 16mm? and I cant impost iso...its automatic(because I have a CCD) so...you have an electrick mount which rotate the camera??
KTM3630 2 years ago
you're way over-thinking this. use whatever lens you want, and accept whatever ISO setting your camera chooses, provided that you "like" the results you see in the preview frame. (That is, take a single shot, look at it, and make exposure adjustments as necessary to fit your desired goal.) Once you have your settings, start shooting the frame sequences, either by using an automated timer, or doing it manually.
argv01 2 years ago
ok,thanks a lot...but If each exposure is 30sec...will I need an motorize mount or only the support for the camera?
KTM3630 2 years ago
When doing time-lapse videos, the EARTH is your motorized mount. It's the thing that's moving--carrying your camera along with it. That's why the stars appear to move. All you need is a tripod.
argv01 2 years ago
oh,thanks...so i take a video of 30 or 15 fps per second...ok,thanks a lot
KTM3630 2 years ago
I don't think you're getting the concept here. It's not 30 frames-per-second. It's 30 seconds PER FRAME. You can't do with this a video camera. You use a regular still camera and shoot individual photos.
argv01 2 years ago
oh,yes but i dont think that in 30 sec of exposure i ll see so good the milky Way
KTM3630 2 years ago
You're right--that's why you need a camera with very high ISO settings and a lens with a very wide aperture (f2.8). I usually use ISO3200, but sometimes 6400. These are currently available in high-end consumer digital cameras, and will probably be more common in 2010 and beyond.
argv01 2 years ago
i have bought a CCD for my telescope and now I want to use it with a 28wich is a fisheye of my fathers old camera(Canon AT-1).this CCD is for the sky but you can set only the time,max 60min Min 1/10000 sec and you can also set the fps Min 3,75Max 60wich are importants for detailes,but you cant set the ISO so If I want to photograph the Milky way I have to take for example 10 photograph andstack them to compare with your results.
KTM3630 2 years ago
great video, what were your exposures? ISO shutter aperture? thanks
nigelolympia 2 years ago
I've updated the video description to include camera settings.
argv01 2 years ago
i live in Perth Australia and i cant see the milky way from there because too much light pollution, but just wondering if i go away from the city, with the naked eye, will the sight of the milky way be as beautiful and colorful as the one in this video? thanks!
kenlim994 2 years ago
these photos are over-exposed by two stops, which means that the camera is picking up detail your eye can't see. Since you never know what the camera sees till you try, you might as well go anywhere that at least "appears" dark, and start shooting. Granted, you need a camera that can at least go to 30 seconds at ISO 3200 at f2.8. Not many consumer cameras can do that....yet.
argv01 2 years ago
You should lock the sky in one position and allow the earth to be seen as moving. That is what is actually happening!
Would be even more amazing!
DrWhat2 2 years ago
Now that *would* be a great idea!
argv01 2 years ago
you could do that with a slow crawling vehicle with a laid path cruising at the speed of the rotation of the earth heading away from the sunrise with the camera computer controlled locked and following a sector.
NukeThirstder 2 years ago
Wicked!
foraminiferal 2 years ago
1 of the most amazing timelapse videos i've ever seen!
theone2225 2 years ago
Excellent video, I reckon it would be cool if you did a full night exposure from sunset to sunrise ;)
Gordo1989 2 years ago 2
It must be real dark where you took these images. Cause you can't get good results near the city. Great job.
bigluttz 2 years ago
with all that light pollution, you still managed to get such a great shot. nice
humanidt 2 years ago
lifes better, the milky way
DragonBreath7575 2 years ago
wow, i really need to go to california sometime
godislonewolf 2 years ago
just go somewhere high, and dark. :)
howdybillybob 2 years ago
great!
sosna00 2 years ago
Awesome! :D
riChiePsywaLker 2 years ago
GR8T VIDEO!! Can i know what are your shutter speed, len size, ISO settings please? Did you use a variety of settings or just one settings and also how many image per hour per shutter speed?I have a 40d canon :)
Dezarus2100 2 years ago
nice! 5*
oyvindoyvind 2 years ago
This is amazing! I took few pictures of it but never attempted with video, I would love to try.
svitale75 2 years ago
what camera did u use? i love it
Ahya728 2 years ago
Wow!
moondoggie71 2 years ago
love it
MsCocoKaren 2 years ago
excelent job !
417329 2 years ago