Moonlight Landscapes Exposures Guide

Moonlight Landscapes Exposures Guide
by Robert Monaghan

Related Links:
Aurora Photography
Barn Door Tracker for Star Photos
Black Cat's Extended Range Exposure Guide [9/2002]
Existing light estimator [04/00]
Fireworks How To Page
Fireworks, How to Shoot [added 10/99]
Fireworks - Shooting with Digital Camera or Film (NYIP) [6/2003]
Fotosharp Pro Field Guides (exposure, DOF, filters etc.)
Kodak Existing Light Tables
Lightning and Weather Related Photography Pages [6/2001]
Lightning Optical Flash Trigger [4/2003]
Lightning Photography tips by Chuck Doswell
Low Light Photography
Low Light Photography
Lunar Photography Pages [7/2001]
Lunar Photos - Woody's Guide to Photographing the Moon
Moonlight Exposure (Alexandre Vaz)
Night Photos, How to Take [2/2001]
Night Photo Gallery
Night Photo Tips and Sample Photos
Night Photography (from School of Photography) [2/2001]
Night Photography Tips (Ken Rockwell) [9/2002]
Night Photography (photo-highway, specialty photogr., night photogr..)
Nighttime Photography, Woody's Guide to
Night Photography Links
Night Photography Tips (Gerard Koh)
Noctonaut Gallery [5/2002]
*Reciprocity Effects Page
Star Streaks (photo.net) [6/2001]
Star Trails How-to Tips
Star Trails primer (RIT FAQ)
Star Trails Tips
Sunrise/Sunset Photography Hints (NYIP)
Time Exposure Tips (Ken Rockwell) [8/2001]
Tips and FAQ
U.S. Naval Observatory Sun/Moon calculator online

In response to a request by Chris Lawson chris.lawson@sympatico.ca -
I was fascinated to see a neat article titled ''Night Sky Landscapes' by Dan Norris - who has a video on ''Night Photography'' available from Black Rabbit Productions (800)-359-2234 - in March 1996 Outdoor Photographer.
The articles showed a series of neat photos of full color moonlighted landscapes complete with star trails or lunar images.

To do this kind of work, you will need:

camera with time or bulb manual settings
locking cable release
tripod
lenses at least f2.8 or faster

Some electronic shutter cameras do provide long duration shutter timings, but only at the expense of using lots of battery power during these time exposures. A fully manual camera with true mechanical bulb settings may be a better option if available, at least if battery life is a concern!

Photograph Settings

Star Trails (moonless night) 1.5 to 8+ hours

crescent moon
color in foreground 1-2 hours

half full moon 1/2-1 hour

half full moon
+ 1-2 days 20 to 45 minutes

nearly full moon
3-4 days prior 10-20 minutes

ISO 50 Velvia film at f/2.8
slightly less for ISO 100

Mr. Norris suggests the f2.8 or f3.5 settings will produce more dramatic stars, and more of them, than will show if slower (f4 or f5.6) settings are used.

The postings below provide some night photography exposure values for Velvia from Barry Eastlock. Reciprocity failure happens during long (or very short) exposures where our usual rules of exposure fail. It takes more exposure to produce the desired exposure.
Which films should you try? Mr. Norris suggests that you look for warmer films such as Fujichrome velvia or Fuji Provia 100 or Lumiere 100 films. See our film page for a free offer of Kodak 120 rollfilm of the new - and warmer - E100SW Kodak films that I hope to try myself shortly ;-).
Which lens is best? A wider angle lens such as the 35mm suggested by Mr. Norris is a good candidate for frame filling foregrounds nicely lighted by the moon. Even inexpensive or zoom lenses can reach the desired f2.8 or f3.5 settings recommended. Focus at infinity works best for most subjects, including the star trails or moon.
Mr. Norris points out that framing is quite difficult in the dark, so either setup and frame during twilight, or use a powerful flashlight as an aid in locating your position. A bubble level also helps avoid leveling problems.
Color shifts due to long exposures, from reciprocity failure effects, tend towards green, as noted by Mr. Xiong below. He suggests a red filter and extra exposure as a possible compensation technique. Naturally, if you are shooting in a city at night, the nightlight pollution will tend to color and limit your exposures. Similarly, if you can keep your exposures relatively short, under 15 minutes or so on Velvia as Mr. Norris suggests, you will avoid most of the green shift effects.
Finally, it pays to cheat. Most folks would love a nice full moon, but it is rarely in the right place. Using a super-telephoto lens to get this photo would eliminate most landscape foreground effects.
To cheat, you take your super-telephoto and capture a number of nice full moon images at maximum magnification. Put these images in the upper left and right corners on at least a few shots. These photos will become your moon stock shots. You can use a slide duplicating setup to provide both the desired dramatic moon shot from the super-telephoto with the moon-lit landscape of your wide-angle lens.
If you don't have a slide duplicating setup, you can use a slide sandwich, putting both images together. Finally, you can photograph the moon with the super-telephoto, putting it where you want it on the frame. Now you can do a double exposure (assuming your camera has this facility) with the longer exposure of the moon-lit landscape as described above.
What about photos of stars as points? Mr. Norris offers this formula:
Exposure (seconds) = 600 / (focal length)
For example, 50mm lens --> 12 seconds, using ISO 400 at f2.8
Mr. Norris suggests that Fuji Provia 400 or Sensia 400 film work best thanks to their inherent warmth
Another trick you can use with your night photography is called ''Painting with Light''. You can use a flashlight, a strobe, a cyalume stick, or any other light source, with or without color filters. A colored plastic sheet from 8x11 report covers works nicely with larger flashlights. Using your light-source, and given your long exposures, you can walk around and highlight a feature, object, or person in your photography. With longer exposures, you won't show in the photograph because you are moving about too fast to register, but your lighting highlights will register nicely.
Another trick worth trying is two colored filters to sculpture your three dimensional object in color. For example, you can use red and green filters from either side of an object. The parts where both red and green filtered light hit will be colored yellow. The parts where grazing red or green light alone hit will be colored by that color. The result provides a very interesting interplay of colors, especially in the shadow areas.
Finally, the moon is reflecting sunlight, so daylight film is used (not tungsten). If you are taking a photo of the moon by itself with your super-telephoto lens, treat it as a sunlighted object (as it is ;-). So 1/250th at f/8 for ASA 50-64 film would probably work fine with a full moon. Try 1/60th for a half-moon, or 1/8th for a crescent moon. Naturally, film is cheap, so it pays to bracket your shots. (Source: pp.90-91 National Geographic Photographer's Field Guide by Albert Moldvay - highly recommended!).
With this information, you can see why you can't put both the moon and a moon-lighted landscape in the same photo without using either a double exposure or other trick (see above). The moon would be wildly overexposed by any exposure which brought out the landscape details.

ASA 100-160 Film Recommended Exposures

subject exposure

streets 1/60, f/2

night club and theatre districts brightly lit 1/60, f/2.8

neon and other lighted signs 1/60, f/4

christmas lighting 1/2, f/4

flood-lighted buildings, fountains, monuments 1/8, f/2

skyline - distant lighted buildings 1, f/2

skyline - 10 minutes after sunset 1/60, f/4

fairs, amusement parks 1/30, f/2

fireworks, on ground 1/60, f/2.8

fireworks, in air open shutter, f/11

fires, bonfires, campfires 1/60, f/2.8

lightning open shutter, f/8

landscapes by moonlight 15 sec, f/2

snow scenes by moonlight 8 sec, f/2

full moon 1/125, f/16

half moon 1/125, f/8

Source: p.57, Roger Hicks, Medium Format Handbook (Recommended!)

Postings:

Medium Format Digest Posting:
From: barry eastlack barry@cyberramp.net
Subject: Response to Best Films for Night Photography?
Date: 1997-11-24

Again, Velvia is an excellent choice, as I have shot both downtown Dallas and the Morton Meyerson. Reciprocity ratings for Velvia as follows:

Meter Reading: Exposure time: 8 seconds 12 seconds 10 16 12 19 16 28 20 39 25 49 32 66 40 88 50 116 64 158

Medium Format Digest Posting:
From: Zonghou Xiong zxiong@mgg6.crcamet.mq.edu.au>
Subject: Response to Best Films for Night Photography?
Date: 1997-11-25
Be warned that Velvia will turn some underexposed night objects including clouds to green. Bright light spots vs. dark building will be fine, though. You might have to use a red filter and extend the exposure by one stop.
[Ed. Note: I thought the above 120 film data for night photography might stimulate some readers to try out some fun night photography activities!]

From: "Shaw, Joseph" Subject: Capturing the Moonlight?? Fellow Nikon users, A few thoughts in reply to Michael Baker's request for information on shooting moonlit scenes, based on my many hours shooting night pictures. I published a short popular paper (Optics and Photonics News 7(11), PP. 54-55, Nov. 1996 ... e-mail me for reprints) about taking pictures of the blue sky at night. Basically, scattering of moonlight by atmospheric gas molecules causes the sky to be blue with a full moon, just like during the day, but much dimmer. We humans don't have the sensitivity required to see the color, but our cameras do. For example, ISO 200 Ektachrome and f/3.5 produce a beautiful natural-looking blue sky with about a 10 minute exposure. I've shot Kodak and Fuji, ISO 64 to 1600, and they all work great. Higher speed films of course allow you to freeze the stars and get a sky with day-like color but with stars; slower films produce long star streaks that are also interesting additions to the otherwise natural- looking blue sky. Other colors in these pictures usually look very natural...red barns, green grass and trees, etc. Now the catch...this was all in a reasonably dark area away from most city lights. City lights can mess up the color balance, and I've found often create a brownish-green tint. This is usually mostly a problem with little or no moonlight because the full moon is pretty bright! My recommendation, therefore, is to keep experimenting, but don't be afraid to leave that shutter open for a long time. Start shooting a night or two before full moon, taking notes and bracketing a lot, then go back and catch the full moon with a good idea of what works best. Don't forget to use a sun shade on your lens...especially if you use a zoom. You might not see flare, but the long exposure can make it a real problem. I'd try slides first because of the inevitable question of what color gets printed on prints (although I've gotten great moonlit prints as well). Good luck... Joseph Shaw Optical Engineer Boulder, Colorado

From: "Thom Hogan" thom_hogan@email.msn.com Subject: FM-10 (Again), Moonlight exposures Another poster asked about moonlit shots. A couple of comments are warranted: 1. Use slide film. Short of having a good working relationship with a clairvoyant print lab, this is the only way you'll see what you really caught. You can always have it made into a print later (and then the lab will have something to color match against). 2. Yes, reciprocity will be a problem. In general, start at what the correct exposure should be (typically f/2.8 at 16 seconds for ISO 100) and bracket two to three stops towards overexposure. There's a starting chart in my book, but what I'm going to suggest next will take you off that chart. 3. The longer your night exposure from moonlight, the more interesting (and haunting) the shadows will get (they'll lose sharp edge definition and tend to "blossom"). You can really get carried away and take an all-night exposure, in which the shadows start to completely disappear, yet things look lit directly. You'll have to experiment a lot here to get the effect you want, and exposures will be tricky at first. 4. For another eerie effect: take multiple exposures hours apart. Here you'll get a distinct shadow for each exposure, and if taken at appropriate intervals, it can look like light was coming from several different angles. 5. Remember that the Nikon automatic cameras (8008, N70, N90, F4, F5, etc.) chew up batteries like crazy when you do long exposures with them, and most have a top-end cutoff of 30 seconds under default settings (on the F5 you can use custom setting 19 to allow long exposures). Get the remote release if you're going to do this often (or use a locking mechanical release on something like an FM2n or FM-10 [you knew I was going to say that, right?]). Thom Hogan

Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998
From: Christos Manassis cmanas@edessa.topo.auth.gr
Subject: Lunar Photography (was: the Moon)

I noticed the thread about photographing the Moon and thought I could give some help. Here are some guidelines for Lunar photography. Being an amateur astronomer as well, I had all these handy.
The Moon is at a distance much greater than that most photographic lenses are designed to perform, and we are trying to capture it through Earth's entire atmosphere.
A correct moon shot for an astronomer would be one in which the moon (or part of it) would be in perfect focus, without signs of camera shake or atmospheric turbulence and exposed correctly to reveal the most possible highlight and shadow detail.
Focusing the moon should be easier with lenses that have a definite infinity stop. For lenses with focusing rings that rotate past infinity (like most Nikon AF lenses) a sharp eye and a bright focusing screen are required. With long telephoto lenses, it is always better to eye-check focus even if the lens has an infinity stop. A focusing magnifier is a useful accessory anyway.
To keep a camera steady, select a calm, cold night with good visibility and use a heavy tripod. For the extreme distance of the Moon, a blurry image can come out of three causes:

1 - Reflex mirror shake. If your camera has a mirror lock function, by all means use it. Wait several seconds for the mirror's vibration to fade out. 2 - Shutter curtain shake. Nothing you can do about it, except using a digital camera with "electronic shutter". For a long time exposure on a driven mount, use the "hat trick" method to expose the film. 3 - Motion blur caused by earth's rotation. This is caused by an incorrect combination of shutter speed / focal length. For stationary cameras (cameras mounted solidly on a very stable tripod) a guideline for the maximum exposure is: tmax = 250 / Focal length (mm) Therefore: 500 mm --> 1/2 sec max 1000 mm --> 1/4 sec max 2000 mm --> 1/8 sec max If you can't match your focal length and maximum exposure time, then you must use a tracking mount. This will only happen with extreme telephotos or telescopes. The Moon's phase is important for a correct exposure because the Moon's brightnes changes rapidly as it's phases progress. Do not trust your camera's built-in lightmeter. The following exposures are for ISO 100 film and an aperture of f/5.6: Thin Crescent --> 1/30 sec Wide Crescent --> 1/60 sec Quarter --> 1/125 sec Gibbous --> 1/250 sec Full --> 1/500 sec

A correct exposure of the Moon always requires plenty of bracketing at half or third stop increments over a range of +/- 2 stops. This is because of the varying distances between the Sun, Moon and Earth, (everchanging brightness) and because of the fact that the light the Moon reflects to Earth is not like sunlight (film performance). This effectively means that a night out shooting the Moon will result in many exposed rolls.
If you use a long lens (say over 300 mm) it would be a nice idea to stop it down to improve it's performance. If you use an extreme lens (eg, 1000 mm + 3x teleconverter) you will notice the speedy drift of the Moon due to earth's rotation. You must time your exposure carefully, especially if you use mirror lock.
As always, use the slowest film you can.
Moon is generally colorless so, if you are a B&W; fan, go for a B&W; film. Night scenes are very tricky for a standard minilab, so it may be better to shoot slides. Request that the film will be returned uncut anyway.
Hope it helped a bit,
Best Regards,
Christos.
- --
Christos Manassis (cmanas@edessa.topo.auth.gr)
Mechanical Engineer
2 Olimbiados st.
GR-546 32 Thessaloniki
GREECE

rec.photo.misc
From: msawdey@aol.com (MSAWDEY)
[1] Re: Adapter Ring. Help!
Date: Mon Apr 27 22:14:08 CDT 1998
> A friend and I want to use our cameras with a telescope. Is there a >special adapter ring required? Where does one go about getting such a thing? > >Any other pointers for photographing night sky? No, I can't afford one of >those fancy, servo-motor drives to track a heavenly body! > >Thanks, > >

Many telescopes use the T-mount adapter system. You can purchase a T-mount to go on almost any camera. Try the Porter Camera Store catalog if a local dealer doesn't carry them.
To get a reasonably clear exposure, you'll need some way to track the heavens (compensating for the rotation of the earth, of course). There is a simple home-made device called a "barn door mount" that may do the trick. See http://www.execpc.com/~rnabholz for plans. It is two pieces of wood with a hinge between, a piece of 1/4-20 threaded rod, a couple of nuts, (the hex kind, not the kind that would sit outside for hours on a winter night making pictures of stars) and a 1 RPM timer motor (see your local surplus store). It is claimed that this device is accurate enough to get a sharp image with up to about 30 seconds exposure (maybe it's several minutes, I can't quite remember), which is more than enough with fast color film. The webpage cited, and some links, show images taken with this kind of equipment, actually, using just moderate telephoto lenses rather than a telescope--quite impressive.

From: scootertrs@aol.com (SCOOTERTRS)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.misc
Subject: Re: Help:long exposures
Date: 22 Jun 1998
Hi John
Basically for most cameras you have a standard cable release that can be bought in almost any length desired. Cost can be from a few dollars to over a hundred for special 2-cable jobs. You can also get air, electrical, radio or IR remote camera trips. The selection will depend on your needs, budget and type of camera you want to use it on. Having been involved intimately with lightning photography years ago while in college at Univ. of Fla. at the lightning lab I remember several issues I had trouble with.
1. The night is not black-even if pitch black...2-10 minute exposures as you wish to make most of your night shots look like dusk (dark blue sky)...
2. lightning is extremely bright and it will act as a major strobe...need to stop the lens way down
3. No need for real fast film...see #2
4. Must use a good sturdy tripod
5. Do not forget film reciprocities...(film does not behave in a linear progressive fashion as time of exposure exceeds those that it was designed for) There are many books now in print regarding existing light photography (what you are trying to do). Before you spend money on film, developing, equipment or what have you, read a couple of the books on the subject...It is by far too complex a topic to cover well here.
By the way, Have Fun...Existing light photography is by far the most unintrusive and diversified form of photography...

From: Ralph Gonzalez rgonzale@ibl.bm
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.misc
Subject: Re: Help:long exposures
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998
PATTI SMITHWICK wrote:
> How do I go about taking long exposures(2-10min.)? I am obviously an > amature and want to photograph lightning. I keep reading about shutter > release cables or something to that effect. What exactly are they, and > how do they work? :-)

A shutter release cable is simply a device which lets you click the shutter without touching the camera, to avoid shaking the camera and thus blurring long exposures.
Does your camera have threading in the shutter relase where you can insert such a cable? Does it allow long exposures (ie, does it have a "bulb" setting for shutter speed)? If so, then as the other respondent said, try using relatively slow film and/or closing the lens to f/8 or more to avoid washing out the sky. Put the camera on a sturdy tripod and push the cable release, hold it for a few minutes or a few lightning crashes (some cable releases have a screw which you can tighten so you don't have to stand there with your finger on the cable release during the whole exposure), and then release it to close the shutter.
Or are you lucky enough to have a camera with a timer setting? (A very few point and shoots have a timed shutter for exposures up to a couple of minutes. Don't confuse this with a self-timer which simply gives you 10 seconds before the shutter actually snaps).Or do you have an extremely generous autoexposure range which will keep the shutter open for several minutes without touching the camera? (My old Minox 35EL did this, but I don't know of any other camera that will. It was rated at up to 30 sec. exposure, but in practice would often hold the lens open up to 2 minutes for great nighttime shots.) In this case you don't need a cable release. Just hold your hand in front of (not touching) the lens while you press the shutter, let go of the shutter, and then remove your hand from in front of the lens. That way no light gets into the camera while you are pushing the shutter, and therefore there is no blurring.
Good luck! Many of my favorite pictures were done at night -- the camera will show you things which you can't see with your eye, like how some streetlights are green, some are orange, etc.
--
Ralph Gonzalez
rgonzale@ibl.bm.get.rid.of.stuff.after.bm

From: "William Wilson" wilson.w@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.film+labs
Subject: Re: July 4th Fireworks - Film?
Date: 23 Jun 1998
Most of the cats in this area shoot a slow slide film 50-100 ISO. Focus on something in the foreground and expose for that,then set shutter on bulb. Say the correct exposure for the forground object (here it is a local landmark campanile) is 5 seconds, hold your hand or a card over the lens (camera is on a tripod of course). When a fire work missile goes up get ready, it goes off, remove hand or card, count one one thousand then replace cover on lens. Repeat for five explosions or five counts of one one thousand. Now you have the foreground object nicely exposed and surrounded by nice clusters of fire works.
I have not done this but I have seen the results and they are pretty impressive, and prize winners too.
Bill

From: photogf128@aol.com (PhotogF128)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Photos of the moon
Date: 28 Jun 1998
Moonscapes is one of my specialities. I have a few on my website www.photoswest.com.
I use a 200mm lens and shoot at F5.6 at 1/125 shutter speed with 100 asa film.
Bracket your shots, also try F8 at 1/125 etc and you should do fine. I then double expose them later. Hope this helps.
Phil

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998
From: Peter Klosky PKlosky@bdm.com
Subject: Re: night portrait -Reply
Got an interesting response regarding night portraits with a Hasselblad. Message and some discussion below, for those interested.

> Michael H. >I'm guessing that you wish to use f8 to get enough depth of field.

You'll be facing reciprocity failure of PMC at these times. Remember to increase your exposure accordingly. I think doubling it would be about right, but you could look at the Kodak publication to check. Of course that will increase contrast a bit, but that shouldn't be a problem given the already low contrast of PMC.

>Avoid ambient light on the people.

That way, if they move a little bit it won't matter that way. Of course if they move a lot it will they'll look like ghosts because you'll be able to see some of the background through them!
Thanks for mentioning the see-through issue. I had thought of going on bulb, and flashing them, then covering to move them out of frame. That wouldn't work.

> Second, 4 seconds is getting long enough that you should consider changing the focus *during* the exposure. Leave focus on the people when the flash goes off, then quickly move focus to infinity for the duration of the exposure to get sharper details in scene behind. Naturally, you'll want a steady tripod. If the people will hold fairly still, you could even temporarily cover the lens with a black card while you adjust focus to avoid kinks in the lights from camera movements while you change the focus. Of course, you could also do a double exposure, but that might require even more patience on the part of your human subjects!

I think I'll probably go with f4 on low power flash, so the exposure time is shorter. And I may have them sit or lean against a fence so they move less. I had never heard of moving focus during an exposure.
I know focus can change magnification from enlarger work, so there there might be a "zoom effect" look to the result.

> Bring a flashlight to help you focus on the people before making the exposure. It'll also help you avoid reflections off people's glasses, etc.

A flashlight is a fine idea.

>Let me know how it goes! Michael.

I'll be sure to let you know. And, as usual, I'll try a Polaroid. That is, if I have the strength to lift it out of the bag after running after this bride all day and night. The reception location is the Fort McNair Officer's Club in Washington, DC. The building is located on some nice land next to the Potomac river. It is a nice spot to catch a sunset, and there is also a view of the Washington Monument. I'll probably try for a skyline shot or a building shot of the Officer's club, for my attempt to mix a night exposure with a foreground portrait.
Peter

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998
From: Joe McCary - Photo Response mccary@erols.com
Subject: Re: night portrait -Reply
I have shot in that area. I would suggest not a night shot (with black sky) but rather a dusk shot where you have some light in the sky and the monuments are lighted. That way you could use a higher f-stop and perhaps a longer lens (250mm maybe?). Good luck. You would be real lucky if the assignment was at the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs home! That has the best view. Also the Top of the Hill restaurant not too far away has excellent views as well.
Joe

From: Raymond Lee rlee77@mbox5.singnet.com.sg
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Night photography
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998
Jack wrote:

> How long and at what aperture do I use to take pictures of stars > a) without any star movement

Use this simple formula : 600 / Focal length
Eg : using a 50mm lens = 600/50=12 sec without trail.
But you can go up to 20sec without trail if the stars is around 45 above horizon.

From: bbarnibus@aol.com (BBarnibus)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Night photography
Date: 28 Jul 1998 04:20:02 GMT
I have been doing a lot of astrophotography and can tell you that aperture really has nothing to do with it. Speed is the key. Even with ASA3200 film anything less than several seconds is to short. I use a lot of Fuji Super G 800 film and exp. of up to 60 seconds with a 50 mm lens, maybe 120 seconds with a 28mm lens with out star trails. The longer the focal lg. the shorter the exp. should be. I can get about 15 seconds with my 300mm lens on a good sturdy tripod. BUT star trails can be cool, try pointing at the north star and leave the shutter open for 10 min, you get round star trails. The other thing to keep in mind is light polution in citys, it can make the sky very light at even a few seconds, try to get 15 or 20 miles outside of a large city or a few miles outside of a small city to get dark skys. If you can see the milky way you are in dark skys.
There are some links on my web page that will help you, go to : http://members.aol.com/stratman64/home.html.
Bernie in Denver

From: "Michael A. Covington" covington@mindspring.com
Subject: Re: Celestial Photography.
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1998
I tuned in really late, but if you're interested in photographing the moon, see
http://www.mindspring.com/~covington/astro
Your telephoto lens will be sharper at say f/8 or f/11 than f/22. Vibration is a *major* concern, and so is steadiness of the air between you and the moon!
And if you expose 2 minutes, remember that the earth's rotation will smear everything. (The moon was setting, right?) You've got to get it down under 1/30 second to "stop" the rotation of the earth. I didn't see your picture, but I'm guessing the 2-minute exposure is what got you.
Best regards,
Michael Covington
Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur

From Medium Format Digest:
From: stefan poag stefan@icon-stl.net
Subject: Response to Best Films for Night Photography?
Date: 1998-07-30
I have done trials and find that there is no "perfect" film or filter for this process --- all different light sources give different colors of light---you can correct for one--incandescent, lets say, that is very warm for a daylight film like Fuji, and then you won't be able to correct for another -- fluorescents, for example. The problem is compounded by the fact that as different artificial light sources age, their color temperature changes. If an area is lit by 6 different fluorescent tubes, all 6 may read a different color temp. Your eye generally can't see these differences very well at all. I have shot test film with a MF camera of a nightime city scene that had fluorescent, incandescent and unidentified light sources. None was absolutely correct. I used Velvia, EPP, Agfa RSX 100, Ektachrome 64T. I exposed without filters, with a color correction filter that shifted from 3400 K to 5500 K (I don't have the wratten number at hand), 10 M, 20 m and 30 m and others --- the ones that pleased me most were on EPP with the 30m and the RSX 100 with 30m.
Note that this was my subjective judgement -- if you shoot you will have to make your own decisions as to what compromise you can live with. I haven't photographed with transparency film outside at night for a while, but if I were to do it I would try several different film and filter combinations in each location to account for the changing light.

From: "Fernando Gomes" fgomez@mail.telepac.pt
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: calculating exposure for night photography?
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998
Hi
I have some great shots with just using different settings (night shots at Paris, f1.4, 1/2, 1 and 2 s, for example), but for black and white, I compensate when I put it into paper.
There is a guide, that I found interesting, and I will use it when I need to make some night photos. It is the Universal Light Code (ULC). You simply define the scene light code (using the guide), input the film speed, and you can then play with aperture and speed to this scene. No metering used! Look at http://www.teleport.com/~bcat/ulc.html , and play with it. You can use it as a guide for shooting using the moonlight, for fireworks, and all these difficult (or impossible) to measure scenes
If you use it, tell me your results.
> Good luck
Fernando Gomes

From: LenS LENSTON@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: calculating exposure for night photography?
Date: 31 Aug 1998
Pearisgirl wrote:

> I'm kind of still a beginner in photography. I was wondering, for those night > photographs, how do you know how much exposure to use? Like one second or one > minute. >

There's no simple answer.
First, is your subject illuminated by artificial light or even natural light (starlight, moonlight), or is your subject the light source itself?
For example, suppose you wanted to make a picture of the moon. Well, the moon is an object illuminated by the sun, and pretty much the same rules apply to pictures of the moon as any other sunlight illuminated object. If you would have given an object in sunlight 1/200 at f/8, then that's what the moon ought to get. Bracketing one half stop wider and one half stop smaller ought to do it fine. Some light meters will indicate a higher exposure than necessary because they see all that black sky surrounding the moon. Now, if you want to photograph the lights at a carnival you're photographing a light _source_, and your exposures will be short or apertures smaller. Objects illuminated by the carnival lights will require longer exposures.
If you want to photograph a scene illuminated by the moon, that's a different story. Longer exposures or wider apertures will be necessary. I like to make several exposures in these cases if I can't take a meter reading. Even with a meter reading, bracketing is a good idea.
I suggest some experimentation. Make some nighttime pictures and keep notes. Be sure to have a tripod. A sea or landscape illuminated by the moon probably calls for several seconds or more, depending upon the film speed and aperture. I've made pictures in full sunlight with a pinhole camera that required 5 or 10 second exposures.
If you shoot color print film and you want to keep your costs down while you're experimenting, just have the film developed without prints. Then examine the negatives, looking for the least dense (faint image) and most dense (very dark) and try to find negatives in between. Then have a few of the better negatives printed.
If you're shooting transparencies, then the results will be immediately obvious (and your cost will be less than for prints).
Keep notes on what you're doing and don't be afraid to experiment.
Good luck!
-Len

From: godders@netcom.com (Godfrey DiGiorgi)
Subject: Re: calculating exposure for night photography?
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998
One of the nicest starting points for calculating night exposures is the Available Light Calculator in the Kodak Pocket Photoguide. Measuring light at true available darkness levels is mostly hopeless, this talks about the scene dynamics and suggests a good starting point for exposure. Good stuff! $13 at your local photo shop.
godfrey

rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: "Roger" roger@nationwideisp.net
[1] Re: How to take Night Pictures
Date: Sun Sep 20 04:26:27 CDT 1998
Meter from the pools of light around the street lamps. Make an allowance for reciprocity failure (one or two stops extra should do it), but bracket as well. Try and avoid stationary traffic as the headlights will burn out parts of the picture. You can try zooming throughout the exposure if you have a zoom lens and don't think this is a tacky effect.
You can use slow film - I assume you're going to take a tripod.
Roger

From: chipcurser@aol.com (ChipCurser)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.misc
Subject: Re: How do you focus at night?
Date: 13 Oct 1998
Your question can be answered many ways. Depending on the subject you will be focusing on. If it is a person or close object, you could light the subject with a flood or other light - focus the camera and the shut the flood off and take the picture. For some scenes you may be able to set up your camera during daylight hours, focus when there is light and then take the picture when it is night time. Another way is to use the distance setting marks on the lens. If you can figure the hyperfocal distances you want then set the focus according to the aperature and hyperfocal distance. Sorry I can't be of more help, but that should be a start. Someone else should come up with better ideas then mine. Good luck

[Ed. note: reminder to shoot a daylight standard color shot for aligning nighttime shots or a strobe shot...]
From: spinynrmn@aol.com (Spiny Nrmn)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Astrophotography Enquiry
Date: 1 Nov 1998
If your camera is manual, or can be set that way, set the exposure to bulb, and the F stop to the widest (smallest number) you can. Get 400 speed film or faster, with kodaks 3200 black and white a good choice. Take the first picture on the roll of a "normal" subject to let the developers know where to cut the negative and where the borders are to print the film. You will also need a tripod and a cable release that can lock the shutter open. The night you go out, look for a backwards question mark in the sky and aim so that it is just out of the frame. Limit your picrtures to about 5 minutes, then move to a new location in the sky. Good luck.
Carpe Noctum,
Bill

rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: x35g@aol.comnospam (X35g)
[1] Re: Pictures at night?
Date: Fri Nov 06 14:24:04 CST 1998
If you mean your camera's old meter isn't adequately sensitive, then there's no real help. If the problem it that your camera cannot display the setting needed, try cranking your ISO setting up to 1000,1600 or better to get an exposure reading, then just transpose the shutter speed by the number of ISO stops you "lied about". I.E. 3 stops = shutter speed x 8.

rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: "Chris Eve" someone@somewhere.com
[1] Re: Pictures at night?
Date: Fri Nov 06 16:43:53 CST 1998
The first time you try it it's guesswork. Make copius notes and bracket at least +/- 2 stops for each shot. Then go back and use this experience to improve the result. Unless you've got a really fast lens, we're talking exte-e-ended exposures here. Don't forget the tripod :-}

rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: spinynrmn@aol.com (Spiny Nrmn)
[1] Re: night photography
Date: Sat Nov 07 16:20:17 CST 1998
I have been wanting to take a picture of a full moon for a while now and would like some advise on how to do this.
I've been trying for a while too. I can tell you this much. Unless you have at least a 300mm lens, you will the the moon to be a highlight in the picture, not the subject. A shorter lens will not show any real detail from the craters. On page 332 of a book called STAR WARE is a chart giving a guide line for exposure settings for the brighter planets and moon. It suggests 1/500th of a second on F/8 with 400 speed film for a full moon. Each week after full adds one stop to the setting, so a Gibbous moon would be 1/250th, or f/5.6. The best way would be to get a 12 exp roll, and start at one end and move up til you're out of film. Best of luck
Bill

rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: Ronald Shu shourong.shu@isc.ucsb.edu
[1] Re: night photography
Date: Sun Nov 08 00:08:10 CST 1998
Go to Photo Info Highway at http://128.111.124.11/ssr/photolinks.htm#Techniques & Tips
In the 'Tech & Tips' section, you can find the info you needed. Good luck, Enjoy the full moon.
Ronald

Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998
From: "J.F. Harrison" ahdaishagwa@hotmail.com
To: rmonagha@mail.smu.edu
Subject: in response to http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/moonlight.html
Hi, I've enjoyed reading your web pages. There was one page with info on night exposures that at one point went:
"Mr. Norris suggests the f2.8 or f3.5 settings will produce more dramatic stars, and more of them, than will show if slower (f4 or f5.6) settings are used. "
and
"Which lens is best? A wider angle lens such as the 35mm suggested by Mr. Norris is a good candidate for frame filling foregrounds nicely lighted by the moon. Even inexpensive or zoom lenses can reach the desired f2.8 or f3.5 settings recommended. "
I have a comment. Regarding capturing stars on film, the reason for using a bright lens is not for the f stop in particular but instead for the real aperature of the lens. The stars are point light sources, and their brightness is in proportion to the square of the aperture. Smaller f stop => larger aperture, thus the fast lens recommendation, but the wider angle lens you use, the smaller the real aperture will be for a given f stop.
A 35mm lens at f3.5 would have an aperture of 10mm, and a 50mm lens at f5 would have the same 10mm aperture, as would an 80mm lens at f8. The trees will be much darker under the same conditions and times for the 80/f8 than with the 35/f3.5, but the stars will be the same. More to the point, if you use a 35mm f2.8 rather than an 80mm f2.8, you will get a much wider view, but the stars in the 80 will be more than 4 times brighter, which among other things means the bright star trails will be brighter, and ones you wouldn't have picked up at all with the 35 will show on the 80.
Hope I haven't wasted your time telling you something you already know. Thanks again for your public service, providing all the online information.
Regards,
JFH

rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: "Paul Skelcher" skelch@erols.com
[1] Re: Fireworks
Date: Sat Jan 16 10:57:01 CST 1999
For 100 ASA, f8-f11, for 50 ASA f5.6 or f8.
Wider apertures will cause wider streaks for a given film speed. Time, 5-15secs. When a firework is set off, you hear the thump, it streaks vertically, bursts, spreads out, often bursts again, then dies or trickles down to the ground. The whole process usually takes less than 20secs. Look and listen for the patterns and timing of the firework sets. What do you want to record? The longer the exposure, the longer the streaks , and the more chance of overlapping fireworks. Exposure too long, too much light, washed out, overexposed burnt-out image. Too short, a few scattered pinpricks of light against mostly black. 7-10 secs works best for me.
For July 4, look in local paper for the occasional display on 7/2 or 7/3, shoot some film, keep notes, get it same day processed, so you're ready for the 4th and often the 5th.
Get there early enough to check out a good position, and a backup site because a family of giants will sit in front of you 5mins before the show. For Macey's fireworks I'm in NY at lunch time starting the search, in position at 5 or 6pm. Call in advance, police, tourist office, local sponsors for info. For instance, a map of Macey's showed the position of the firework barges in the East River, which turned out to be wrong. Talk to those other crazies lugging around tripods, they may have been there before and know exactly the what when and where.
Load 2 bodies w film, 28 or 35mm lenses, reload fast during the brief breaks, be ready for the finale. Have a pee before you settle down, don't drink anything-it'll be a long night. Take a small flashlight, plenty of unboxed film-one pocket for unexposed, one pocket for exposed, so no confused fumbling in the dark. Colored tape on cable releases otherwise they're lost. Flash for the crowd if you feel confident using it under pressure, once the show starts you'll be real busy. If you're kneeling on the ground, thick pants, even knee pads. Bug spray. Book to read while you wait.
Most important, have a blast, shooting fireworks is almost as exciting as spreading those slides on thelight box a couple of days later!
Paul

From Nikon Digest:
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999
From: Dave Schneider dschneider@arjaynet.com
Subject: RE:Advice for Night photography [v04.n232/8] [v04.n234/11]
The 30 second shutter speed of the N90s will not give you much of a star streak, you will need to have exposures of a few minutes. If you want pictures of the moon that are sharp with details of the moon you will need to keep exposures down 30 seconds or less. Remember the relative distance of the moon and stars as well as the fact that moon is moving while the earth is rotating on its axis.
I recently returned to doing night photography, mostly industrial locations under sodium vapor lights. I had done this type of work many years ago using my medium format equipment. This latest attempt was with my 4x5 camera and my Nikons. The problem I encountered was a tremendous amount of flare with the Nikon 35-135 zoom lens and a significant amount with my 50mm F1.4. The trusty Rodenstock lenses on my 4x5 were absolutely free of flare. Any comments? The Nikon coatings more subject to flare with the wavelenght of light generated by the sodium vapor lights?

From Nikon Digest:
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999
From: "Bill H. Hilburn Jr." bhilburn@pacbell.net
Subject: Lens hoods and flare [v04.n234/22]
Hello,
There was a recent post concerning lens hoods and flare, and I would like to make one late comment.
Robert in Redlands wrote: I presume that all the shots were taken with the sun in front of or slightly to the side of the photographer, if the sun was behind you, the hood would hardly make a difference unless there was a highly reflective object right beside you.
One of the things I have done was shooting photos for our local newspaper, and I found that a lens hood was mandatory when shooting at night, especially at or near a crime scene. I can remember a call at about 3 AM, sending me to shoot an airplane crash where the flight path of Stockton Field passes over Highway 99. It was a cold and rainy night, and the light plane had touched down east of 99, and slid in the mud to a stop in the middle of the north bound lanes. There were flares and flashing lights as far as the eye could see, as well as the headlights of the cars passing the location in the southbound lanes. Shooting at night and n the rain are usually bad enough, but all of the spurious lights and reflections made it a nightmare. I shot three rolls of film through three Olympus bodies, and similar lenses, with lens hoods on two of the three lenses. To make it short, I found that the flare and glare had done a number on my compositions, but none of the shots from the lens without a hood were usable, despite the fact that this lens was the least prone to flare of the three. There was a ton of flare on the other cameras, but there were also plenty of usable shots. As a result, I always use the proper lens hoods on all of my lenses.
Adios,
Bill Hilburn Jr.

From Nikon Digest:
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999
From: Pat Warnshuis patw@hevanet.com
Subject: Advice for Night photography [v04.n235/2]
Point your camera at the North Star. It appears to stand still while all the others rotate around it.
Use a VERY long exposure, at least an hour and up to six hours at f16 for any effect. For the last 10 minutes, open up the aperture to max. This will give you star trails with the end points as bright little dots. That will help you identify the constellations in the print.
Watch for dew on the lens. If it starts to build up and you can get power to the shoot site, dry it out with a hair dryer while the lens is still open.
good luck.
....patrick

From Nikon Digest:
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999
From: "John Wilkinson" jrwilk@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: Advice for Night photography [v04.n232/8] [v04.n235/18]
Greetings Sergio,
Thom Hogan has a great guide to night photography in his book, "The Nikon Field Guide." I have no connection to Thom or his book, but have tried his guide & have found it to be accurate.
According to Thom, using ISO 100, Star trails should be shot at maximum aperture with a 20 minute exposure. Full moon: f/11 @ 1/125 second, Half moon: f/11 @ 1/30, Crescent moon: f/11 @ 1/4. Scenes lit by full moon (minimum exposure): f/2.8 @ 3 minutes, (maximum exposure): f/2.8 @ 16 minutes, Scenes lit by quarter moon: f/2.8 @ 15-30 minutes, Scenes lit by crescent moon: f/2.8 @ 30-60 minutes.
Don't forget reciprocity effects (check your film's guide sheet). Exposures longer than 30 seconds result in an oblong moon with blurred or washed-out details.
I recently made some exposures of a full moon using this guide & they all came out well. I've also taken moon-lit scenes using similar exposures successfully. I hope to reproduce a couple of the moon-lit scenes & add them to my web site soon. They're B&W;, so they're not as dramatic as they might be in color, but anything's better than nothing.
Give these a try & let us all know how they turn out.
Best regards,
John

rec.photo.misc
From: mcminn@mail.idt.net (Logan McMinn)
[1] Re: painting with light
Date: Wed Feb 10 08:54:19 CST 1999
Painting with light is a very old technique for lighting large areas with one light. All you need is a light source, a camera with a shutter that can be kept open ("b" or "t" setting), and practice. An assistant is very useful if you have one.
In short, you open the camera lens and start directing the light at various parts of the scene you want to see in the print. You must, of course, keep the light source out of view of the lens. Painting with an automatic flash is fairly easy. You just fire the flash as many times as needed to light the various surfaces in the image. Then close the lens and advance the frame. The best and simplest example I can think of is a 1930's (or perhaps older) shot of a New York City subway or aquaduct tunnel under construction. The tunnel was huge. The photographer set up his camera and fired about a half dozen flash bulbs as he walked away from the camera down the tunnel. He zigzagged frome one side to the other, as I remember, firing the flash at the opposite wall. This let him light almot 300 feet of a tunnel with a single flash unit.
Ansel Adams describes the technique in one of his original "Basic Photo" books -- probably the one that deals with light. He used a floodlight to supplement the existing light in a restaurant, lighting up the dark areas and creating highlights on some shiny leather. An assistant is almost a requirement. His job is to carefully cover the lens between flashes in order to keep extraneous light from exposing the film.
Needless to say, it requires a fair amount of practice to learn how to do it consistently successfully.
jhm@webtv.net (Jo helen matheson) wrote:

>i have heard some talk recently on painting with light. it seems to use >special equiptment and i persume a special technique. canybody know >about it and where i can find any information. > >jo helen

rec.photo.misc
From: michaelmlp@aol.com (MichaelMLP)
[1] Re: painting with light
Date: Wed Feb 10 15:08:30 CST 1999
A similar technique that I have used in the past is to paint an object using a flashlight and colored filters. The idea is the same as using a flash to do the painting: find an object you want to "enhance" with light, open your shutter, preferably on bulb, and shine the light over everything you want painted. It takes a little practice to get the ray of light moving at the correct speed for the effect you want. Obviously, keeping the light on your subject longer is going to have a more luminous effect than running the light over the object quickly.
A few years back, one of the consumer photo magazines (PopPhoto or one of those) ran an article about a photographer who took this idea to an extreme. He set his camera up in the backyard, and spent all night "painting" everything in the camera's field of view: the garden, the house, the garage, everything. Took him hours to complete one frame of film.
I believe Calumet sells a fiber optic system that you can use for this technique. However, you might want to keep it small at first. Get a small Brinkman or MagLite Flashlight, get the optional colored filters, and have fun.
Another neat idea I tried once is to draw with a flashlight. Again, open up your shutter and, using the flashlight, draw a picture on a flat surface (ie, a wall or garage door.) I found it helps to lightly trace out your picture beforehand with chalk or some other easily washable substance. On the other hand, just doing it freehand might give you some suprisingly interesting results.
Have Fun,
Michael
http://members.aol.com/michaelmlp

rec.photo.technique.nature
From: Default FirstName.MI.LastName@boeing.com
[1] Re: time lapse star shots
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: e907574.evt.boeing.com
Date: Wed Feb 10 13:31:18 CST 1999
Rob,
You need a dark night with no clouds. Clouds will break up the star trails. A moon or city lights will wash out the sky.
I use ISO 40 film (Velvia) exposed at f4 for somewhere between 15 minutes and 6 hours, depending on what lens I use and what effect I want. See my new page at
http://home1.gte.net/bradjm/STipsStarTrails.html
Any lens should record the motion of the stars (I've gone as wide as 28mm with no problem). Your super wide angle simply changes the perspective.
Good luck,
Brad Mitchell
bradjm@gte.net

[Ed. note: for astrophotographers...]
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: cetusphoto@aol.com (CetusPhoto)
[1] A Freeware Astrophoto Exposures Calculator for Windows
Date: Mon Mar 01 20:42:20 CST 1999
Cetus AstroExp - an Astrophoto Exposures Calculator for Windows
If any of you astrophotographers are running some form of Windows on a PC, then you just might be interested in trying out a new freeware astrophoto exposures calculator program.
If you are interested in astrophotography, you are likely aware of the excellent book "Astrophotography for the Amateur" by Michael Covington (the 2nd edition of which is due out any day now). Michael, as a service to all astrophotographers, and as an advertisement for his book, distributes a freeware astrophoto exposures calculator program. However, his program is only for 32-bit Windows (Win 95, Win 98, Win NT4). He has invited anyone interested to adapt his program, and even to port it to other operating systems, which he says he has no intention to do himself.
I have taken Michael's original program, and rewrote it in C++, and then compiled it in two versions, a "simple" version for 16-bit Windows (Win 3.1), as well as an "enhanced" version for the 32-bit Windows platforms. (The 16-bit version will also run on any of the 32-bit Windows OS's, but the 32-bit version will ~not~ run on Win 3.1.)
Both of these versions are available on my web site. If you want to download either, surf on over to , go to the Freeware page, and then scroll down to the bottom of the Freeware page, and click on "astrex16.zip" (for the Win 3.1 version, about 50 KB), or on "astrex32.zip" (for the Win 95, 98, or NT4 version, about 135 KB). (You can also just downlaod http://www.cetussoft.com/astrex16.zip or http://www.cetussoft.com/astrex32.zip .)
(If you do not have Web access, I can send you either file - please specify which - as an email attachment.)
Then, to install either version, unzip the zip file to produce the executable file AstroExp.exe, which you can then put any place you want to on your hard drive. (It will run from any directory.)
To uninstall either version, simply delete AstroExp.exe (from whatever directory you placed it in), and also AstroExp.ini (which AstroExp.exe will have created in your Windows directory). If you saved any astrophoto exposures files (using the 32-bit version), then delete them, as well.
In order to calculate an astrophoto exposure, both versions will ask for these 5 pieces of information:
1. A brightness value (in magnitude per square arc-second) of a celestial object, which you don't have to "invent" ahead of time (so don't panic - ), since you can merely select the appropriate value from the Brightness combo box, such as "6.7" (for a thin crescent moon), or "16.5" (for one of the brighter nebulae, e.g., M42). (You can also type your own value into the combo box, if you wish.)
2. An ASA (or ISO) film speed value, from 25 to 3200, selected from (or typed into) the "Film Speed" combo box. (DIN values are not yet supported.)
3. A reciprocity failure value, from 1.00 (for no failure) to 0.60 (for severe failure), selected from (or typed into) the "Reciprocity Failure" combo box (which also provides suggested values for different types of film).
4. A filter factor value, which you don't have to "invent" ahead of time, since you can merely select the appropriate one from the Brightness combo box, such as "1.0" (for no filter at all, or for just a UV filter), or "6.0" (for a light red #23A filter used with most b&w; films), etc. (You can also type your own value into the combo box, if you wish.)
5. The f/ratio of the camera lens or of the telescope being used, from 1.0 to 400, either selected from, or typed into, the F/Ratio combo box.
With these five pieces of information, AstroExp (either version) will calculate an estimated exposure time in either hours, minutes, seconds, or fractions of a second. And, when you exit the program, AstroExp will "remember" your entered values, and will display them again when you restart the program.
In addition, the 32-bit version will also allow you to:
1. Record any notes you wish to type into a "Notes" edit field, and/or
2. Save your values (and notes, if any) to an astrophoto exposures file, and/or
3. Print out a set of values (and notes, if any), if you want a hard copy of them to carry to the observing site. (A print preview function is also provided.)
The 16-bit version is probably basically "finished", except for any needed minor tweaking or bug fixes. It is intended to be simple, to present only a modest footprint on an older Win 3.1 PC (such as an older laptop PC that you might carry out with the rest of your astrophoto gear to an observing site).
The 32-bit version is not so "trim" (though it is still smaller than Michael's Delphi version), and is likely to be further enhanced, with the help of input from users. And that's where you, the "user" come in:
If you're at all interested, I would appreciate your taking a look at one or the other of the two programs, and then letting me know what you find out while using it. I am looking for suggestions for new features. As changes are made, I will make the updated versions available on my web site, replacing the older ones. (Eventually, I will create more prominent links on the Freeware page.)
You might also wish to take a look at Michael Covington's latest version, too, available at http://www.mindspring.com/~melody/astro/index.html . His first version was very much like my 16-bit version in its features. However, he has a brand-new version out now, which offers additional focal length and field of view information (which I have not incorporated into my 32-bit version yet). (However, if you want the "notes", file saving, and/or printing functions, they're only available in my 32-bit version, at this moment.)
Both of my programs are based upon Michael Covington's original program, and should provide the same calculated exposure values. Of course, for an explanation of all of the factors involved in determining astrophoto exposures, refer to Michael's book, "Astrophotography for the Amateur".
Please feel free to take one or both of my program versions "for a test drive", and please provide feedback, if you do. Thanks a lot.
Fred

rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Date: Sat Mar 13 16:27:12 CST 1999
From: B Rowett rowett@aol.com
[1] Sun and Moon Info for Photographers
If you photograph sunrises, sunsets, moonrises, moonsets, or full moons, a shareware program called SunMoon can give you the information you need to be in the right place at the right time.
SunMoon displays and prints sun and moon rise and set times, azimuths, moon phases, and twilight times for thousands of locations worldwide, is
accurate to within one minute, and is easy to use.
You can download SunMoon.Zip from ZD Net at www.hotfiles.com.

rec.photo.technique.misc
From: Bellemare belmare@total.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.misc,rec.photo.technique.nature
[1] Re: Question regarding night photography
Date: Tue Mar 16 20:48:51 CST 1999

Shure... there are good litterature on night photography. Refer to Kodak publications: Law enforcement Photography, UV and Infrared Photography, Fire and Arson Photography, and Surveillance photography.
In those booklets, you will shurely find good litterature on night photo.
Jean-Francois Bellemare
Quebec, Canada

From: "Michael K. Davis" zilch0@primenet.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Meter in fractions of a minute, not seconds
Date: 19 Jan 1999
Hey!
I just heard this and thought I'd post it -- not my idea, but I wish it was! If you do any low light photography and want to get your meter to read fractions of a minute instead of fractions of a second, try this:
1) Just set your ISO to a speed that is six stops higher. ISO 50 film? Set it to 3200. The camera's meter will display fractions of a second, but you go to manual mode and shoot that fraction as a fraction of a minute. Many meters can't be set as high as 3200 and what about when you start with higher speed films than 50? Read the next way to do it.
2) If you intend to shoot at f/22, meter at f/2.8 (a six-stop difference), note the meter's indicated shutter speed while at f/2.8, then stop down to f/22 and use manual mode to shoot that fraction as fractions of a minute instead of fractions of a second.
3) If you open up six stops from where you intend to shoot, to do the metering, open up four stops and use your camera's exposure compensation feature to specify -2 stops. This will combine to a six-stop difference. Note the shutter speed when metering at four stops wider, with -2 compensation specified, then shoot in manual mode at the intended aperture, interpreting the previously noted shutter speed as fractions of a minute.
This works because six stops is a 64x difference and approximates 60 seconds in a minute.
If your meter reads 1/30th, then shoot for 2 seconds (1/30th of a minute).
If your meter reads 1/2, then shoot for 30 seconds (1/2 a minute).
If it reads 1, then shoot for a whole minute.
If it reads 2, shoot for 2 minutes.
Others are more difficult to figure, like 1/125 is 1/2 second. 60 seconds divided by 125 = .48 (Make a chart)
Mike Davis

Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999
I think, if you checkout this web site, you'll find some helpful information. Dan Norris also has a great video explaining night photography and star trails techniques.
http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/moonlight.html
Good Luck,
Bob

rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: "David Clark" dcfife@worldnet.att.net
[1] Re: Night photos in Vegas
Date: Tue Mar 23 16:06:25 CST 1999
If I remember correctly (I haven't shot Vegas at night for about 5 years) I was shooting at 8 to 10 seconds @ f/16 on Elite 100 to get pictures of the Luxor at night and they came out (subjectively) perfect. Other structures are a bit brighter, but that could probably give you a baseline exposure...
David Clark

From NikonMF Digest:
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999
From: Tybee Evans tybee@mindspring.com
Subject: Re: Astro photos with FM2n & ETX & brief bio
Hi Jon,
I've been down that road before and have some experience. The Beattie screens will help. They are better than the split screen rangefinder screen that your FM2n probably has but the Nikon 'C' or 'D' screen will probably work just as well for much less money. Even with a brighter screen focusing for astrophotography is tricky and for the most critical focus astrophotographers use the knife edge method. There are some pretty good resources on the web that describe this in much better detail than I so I won't go into it heavily. Basically you cut through the light cone with a "knife edge" and observe the pattern. If you are in focus the light will suddenly blink on and off when blocked and unblocked. If you are out of focus you will see the knife edge travel through the light cone and the light will gradually dim rather than wink out suddenly. Chris Vedeler has a good article on focusing methods for astrophotography at
http://www.isomedia.com/homes/cvedeler/scope/focus.htm . After you check out his site be sure and visit Rockett Crawfords page at http://web2.airmail.net/capella/myknife.htm where he has an excellent article on building a knife edge focuser out of a dead camera body.
I used to use the eyepiece projection method to photograph the planets. You will need an adapter that fits between your telescope and your camera that holds your eyepiece. You are basically just holding the camera without a lens at the right position to photograph the image formed in the eyepiece. You can get the appropriate adapters from Meade or from Orion telescope. Check Orion on the web at http://www.telescope.com/default.asp and look under their photographic accessories listing.
These days I do most of my astrophotography with CCD camera's. If you'd like to see what these are capable of visit my site and look in the Gallery. Also while you're at my site look on my links page and check out some of the sites under the Astrophotography section. There are some real pro's out there who do some wonderful work. They usually have lots of pointers on their web pages also.
Finally, if you are really interested in Astrophotography you should join the Astrophotography mailing list. This is a fabulous resource with tons of information. Visit their archives at http://www.system.missouri.edu/ics/staff/andy/APML/ . You can search through the past posts and also get instructions there on how to subscribe to the list.
Hope this helps.
...

Tybee Evans
Intricate Micro Systems
tybee@intricate-ms.com
http://www.intricate-ms.com

From: "Kevin Ross" kross@nospam.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.misc
Subject: Re: how does one take photos at night
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999
Capturing the Night With Your Camera : How to Take Great Photographs After Dark by John Carucci
ISBN: 0817436618
$19.95 at amazon.com
I have this book, and I highly recommend it.
-- Kevin

Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999
From: Thomas Heissel Dall tdall@obs.aau.dk
To: nikon@MailingList.net
Cc: rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
Subject: re: night-time shots, reciprocity, moonlight landscapes...
I saw your page and find it great! Just let me add a comment to this:
"Similarly, if you can keep your exposures relatively short, under 15 minutes or so on Velvia as Mr. Norris suggests, you will avoid most of the green shift effects"
the green shift comes from very low light level exposure of the film. However, if you stop the lens down further (say f8 or more) and if you happen to be at a VERY dark location, the exposure of the sky becomes (almost) zero. I have exposed for 70 minutes on f8 and got a perfectly black sky. The trade-off; only the brightest stars will trail, but it still produces some astonishing pictures.
Thomas Dall

From: "Bill Welch" nospam@uclink4.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Sunrise/Sunset Photography
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999
...
> Can anyone offer some pointers on sunrise and sunset photography. > > My efforts seem to be very hit or miss. My skies are often too washed out > and the foreground too dark. > > Any advice would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks

I suggest trying a neutral density graduated filter to "hold back" the sky so its brightness more closely matches the foreground. You'll find if you measure with your light meter that the sky is typically 2 f-stops or 3 f-stops brighter than the foreground. This is what causes your skies to be washed out while the foreground is properly exposed or the sky is properly exposed while the foreground is too dark.
I've found the Galen Rowell Singh-Ray filters to be useful. I believe Galen mentions them on his website, http://www.mountainlight.com/. There are four filters in the set: a 2-stop hard stop, a 3-stop hard stop, a 2-stop soft stop, and a 3-stop soft stop. Use the hard stop when the line between the sky and foreground is pretty much a straight line. Use the soft stop in other cases. You can put a 2-stop filter and 3-stop filter in the same holder for a 5-stop effect.
These are rather expensive filters at about $100 each, but they are supposed to be truly neutral. These filters use the Cokin "P" holders. You can get the filters from Galen, Singh-Ray, or B&H; Photo. The holders you can get from Galen or B&H; Photo. I'm not sure if Singh-Ray carries the holders.
You can probably get by with fewer filters, but it depends on how you use your camera.
Good shooting.
Bill Welch

[Ed. note: this abstract on Solar Eclipse Safety is important safety info..]
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary,alt.astronomy,sci.astro.amateur
Subject: Solar Eclipse Safety
Date: 9 Aug 1999
http://www.skypub.com/sights/eclipses/solar/safety.html
Solar Filter Safety
By B. Ralph Chou
Adapted from Sky & Telescope
A TOTAL SOLAR ECLIPSE is probably the most spectacular astronomical event that people can experience. In 1998 and 1999 the world will witness two solar eclipses well placed for viewing by millions of people. In addition, the Sun is advancing through its 11-year cycle toward solar maximum, expected in 2001, which will entice observers of every caliber to view our nearest star.
In the days and weeks before an eclipse occurs, news stories and announcements in the media provide information on what will happen and how to watch the event safely. Unfortunately, despite the best intentions, inaccurate information on safe observing techniques is often provided. This is especially true when the recommendations concern protective filters for directly observing the Sun. I first published solar filter data in Sky & Telescope's August 1981 issue (page 119), but since that time several new filters intended for both visual and photographic use have come on the market. In June 1996 I participated in a NATO-sponsored meeting on solar-eclipse astronomy. This prompted me to make spectrophotometric measurements of a variety of materials and assess whether they provide adequate protection for the eyes. These included such oddball items as the internal magnetic disk of a 3�-inch floppy, multiple layers of space blanket (a very thin type of aluminized Mylar), compact discs (CDs), and metal-coated Mylar food packaging.
How the Eye is Damaged
Solar radiation reaching the surface of the Earth ranges from ultraviolet light at wavelengths longer than 2900 angstroms to radio waves in the meter range. Environmental exposure to high levels of solar ultraviolet radiation is an established contributor to accelerated aging of the outer layers of the eye and skin and the development of cataracts. But more immediate damage takes place from directly observing the Sun with inadequate eye protection. The eye will transmit most of the radiation between 3800 and 14,000 angstroms to the light-sensitive retina, resulting in retinal burns.
The range of safe filter materials for solar viewing is wide, as is the form such filters can take. The most versatile materials are black polymer and aluminized Mylar (black and green glasses, respectively), which are popularly used both for visual observing and with optical aids.
Exposing the retina to high-intensity visible light triggers a series of complex chemical reactions within the light-sensitive rod and cone cells. The products of these reactions impair the cells' ability to respond to light and in extreme cases can destroy them. Depending on the severity of the damage, an affected observer experiences either a temporary or permanent loss of visual function. This photochemical injury occurs mainly when the retina is exposed to blue and green light.
When longer wavelengths of visible light and near-infrared radiation pass into the eye, they are absorbed by the dark pigment epithelium below the retina. The energy is converted into heat that can literally cook the exposed tissue. Photocoagulation destroys the rods and cones, leaving a permanently blind area in the retina. This thermal damage also occurs during extended exposure to blue and green light. Both photochemical and thermal retinal injuries occur without the victim's knowledge, as there are no pain receptors in the retina and the visual effects do not occur for at least several hours after the damage is done.
Two layers of fully exposed and thoroughly developed black-and-white film can be used as a safe filter for observing the Sun. But color film is unsafe, as it transmits dangerous levels of infrared radiation into your eye.
For each wavelength of optical radiation, the retina has a corresponding exposure threshold beyond which damage is caused. Because these thresholds are well known, the maximum filter transmittance that will still adequately protect your eyes can be calculated. The ratio between the damage threshold and the solar spectral irradiance at each wavelength (assuming the Sun is at the zenith in a clear sky) is a good starting point. For an extra margin of safety, however, the allowable transmittance is then set at between 1 and 0.1 percent of this ratio.
For the waveband between 3800 and 14,000 angstroms (blue light through near-infrared), we find that a filter with a transmittance of 0.0032 percent corresponding to a shade number of 12 provides "adequate" retinal protection during solar viewing. However, this does not take into account visual comfort, in which case a darker filter having a transmittance of 0.0003 percent (shade number 14) is often preferable.
Measuring Filter Transmittance
The various materials that I tested for this article are listed in the following table. Photographic film samples were purchased from a local retailer, exposed to full sunlight, and developed to maximum density according to the manufacturers' instructions. The smoked-glass filter was produced by depositing soot from a candle flame onto a glass microscope slide. The other materials were obtained by random selection from retailers' stocks. Floppy disks were tested with the outer plastic casing removed.

Solar Filter Transmittance (%) Material Shade Visible-Light Near-UV Far-UV Infrared # Black color slide film 15.3 0.000074 0.000041 0.000052 46.98 Ilford FP4 (b/w negative) 15.9 0.000039 0.00011 0.000075 0.0043 Kodak Plus X (b/w negative) 10.8 0.0063 0.0136 0.00016 0.0112 Kodak TMAX 100 (b/w negative) 13.4 0.00049 0.00082 0.00027 0.0040 Lithographic film 13.9 0.00031 0.0013 0.000031 0.0307 Compact disc (CD-ROM) 14.1 0.00024 0.0001 0.000034 0.0044 Floppy disk media 11.8 0.0023 0.000039 0.000041 3.79 Pop-tart Mylar wrapper 10.9 0.0055 0.0328 0.0559 0.0296 Smoked glass 11.6 0.0029 0.00054 0.00032 0.639 Welder's filter shade 12 11.9 0.0022 0.000035 0.000039 0.0049 Welder's filter shade 14 14.2 0.00023 0.000043 0.000034 0.0047 Rainbow Symphony Mylar, visual grade 13.1 0.00067 0.0018 0.00062 0.0279 Rainbow Symphony Mylar, optical grade 14.6 0.00015 0.0005 0.00001 0.0270 Solar Skreen Mylar, visual grade 14.7 0.00013 0.00034 0.000055 0.0042 Solar Skreen Mylar, optical grade 13.2 0.00057 0.0037 0.000052 0.0040 Thousand Oaks Mylar 14.1 0.00025 0.0011 0.000043 0.0047 Questar glass 11.8 0.0024 0.000049 0.000044 0.394 Thousand Oaks T1 glass 12.8 0.0084 0.00004 0.000035 0.160 Thousand Oaks T2 glass 12.2 0.0016 0.000047 0.000028 0.036 Thousand Oaks T3 glass 11.0 0.0053 0.000047 0.000028 0.075 Rainbow Symphony black polymer 15.1 0.000087 0.00002 0.000018 0.1474 Thousand Oaks Solar Shield 2000 black 15.3 0.000078 0.000043 0.000031 0.117 polymer

There are numerous solar filters on the market that weren't evaluated here because of their similarity to other items tested. The purpose of this effort was to determine the general types of materials that make safe filters, not to compare similar designs by different manufacturers. I performed the transmittance measurements using a Cary 5 spectrophotometer at 50-angstrom intervals between 2000 and 25,000 angstroms. A rear-beam attenuator accessory was used to reduce the noise level, but there was still a significant level of signal fluctuation in the infrared and ultraviolet measurements. This is a common problem when one is determining the transmittance of high-density filter materials. I employed software developed in the Ophthalmic Standards Laboratory at the School of Optometry, University of Waterloo, to calculate each filter's shade number and transmittance levels in the various wavelength bands.
Relative Safety of Filter Materials
Not surprisingly, I found a wide disparity in the attenuation of visible light by these materials, even among the "safe" filters. For example, the differences in processing methods and chemistry gave varying optical densities for the silver-bearing black-and-white film emulsions. The double-layer filters had shade numbers ranging from 11 to 16.
I also found a wide range of optical densities between individual audio and data compact discs because of variations in manufacturing processes. Some CDs have aluminum films that are so thin they appear semitransparent at normal room illumination levels. These are unsuitable for use as solar filters. Other CDs, however, are suitable if the aluminum coating is dense enough that the glowing filament of an incandescent light bulb is just barely visible through them.
Welder's filters of shades 12 through 14 are popular and safe solar filters easily obtained at welding-supply outlets. Most observers prefer shades 13 or 14; the solar image through a shade-12 filter is uncomfortably bright.
Floppy disks have only a marginally safe infrared transmission and produce poor-quality images of the solar disk. The magnetic media scatter visible light to the extent that you see a dull red disk surrounded by a broad halo of red light. I would not recommend using this material for a solar filter.
Mylar and glass filter materials gave the most consistent performance. Most of the items specifically designed for eye protection easily met all of the transmittance criteria for safe filters. I would avoid aluminized Mylar used in packaging for food products and collector cards because of the inconsistent optical quality, though the particular pop-tarts wrapper I tested performed surprisingly well. (It rated as marginally safe.)
Unsafe filters include any photographic emulsion bearing an image, chromogenic (non-silver-bearing) black-and-white film, black-processed color film, photographic neutral-density filters, and polarizing filters. Although these materials have very low luminous transmittance levels, they transmit an unacceptably high level of near-infrared radiation. The black color film is a good example, having a shade number of 15 for visible light but transmitting almost 50 percent of the infrared radiation!
For generations smoked glass (glass with a layer of soot from a candle flame) was proposed as a solar filter, but the easily smudged soot makes it unsafe. Mylar food packaging, CDs, and floppy disk media (when the plastic casing is removed) have only recently been considered possible filters, but they, too, are hazardous.
Infrared transmittance levels shown in the earlier table should be regarded as the upper limit for the waveband 780 to 14,000 angstroms. The signal-to-noise ratio for the measurements at these wavelengths is extremely low, and thus these data are less reliable than those for shorter wavelengths. For instance, even some glass filters with very good safety histories showed infrared-transmission levels up to 0.4 percent.
Smoked glass had very good performance in terms of radiation transmission. However, it is a dangerous filter material for two reasons. First, it is very difficult to produce a heavy uniform coating of soot on glass. Second, the coating is fragile. The filter is very easy to destroy by handling it -- much of the soot on my sample came off because of contact with its protective wrapping. It also made quite a mess.
Acceptable solar filters for unaided visual observations include aluminized Mylar specifically designed for viewing the Sun, shade 12 and 14 welding filters, black polymer filters, and two layers of fully exposed and developed silver-bearing black-and-white negative film.
For photographic and aided visual use, particularly with binoculars or telescopes, acceptable filters include aluminized Mylar specifically designed for the purpose and type T1 and T2 glass filters. The Thousand Oaks T3 filter should be used with extreme care for photographic use only.
Not recommended are metal-coated Mylar that is not specifically intended for solar observation, smoked glass, floppy disks, black color transparency (slide) film, chromogenic film (not tested here), and compact discs (because of the inconsistent quality of the metal coating).
My data and comments on safe solar filters will appear in the NASA solar-eclipse bulletins by Fred Espenak and Jay Anderson, beginning with NASA Reference Publication 1398 for the total solar eclipse of August 11, 1999. I have prepared a standard for the safety requirements of solar filters, which can be obtained by writing to me at the address below.
Ralph Chou is an associate professor in the School of Optometry at the University of Waterloo. He is also registrar at the College of Optometrists of Ontario, where he can be reached at 6 Crescent Rd., 3rd Fl., Toronto, ON M4W 1T1 Canada.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Solar-Filter Suppliers ABEL Express 230 East Main St., Carnegie, PA 15106; 412-279-0672 fax: 412-279-5012 Celestron International P.O. Box 3578, Torrance, CA 90510; 310-328-9560 fax: 310-212-5835 Day Star Filters P.O. Box 5110, Diamond Bar, CA 91765; 909-591-4673 fax: 909-591-6886 Edwin Hirsch 8740 Egret Isle Terrace, Lake Worth, FL 33467; 407-641-2851 fax: 407-641-2851 Orion Telescopes & Binoculars P.O. Box 1815-S, Santa Cruz, CA 95061-1815; 408-763-7000 fax: 408-763-7017 Rainbow Symphony 6860 Canby Ave., #120, Reseda, CA 91335; 818-708-8400 Thousand Oaks Optical P.O. Box 4813, Thousand Oaks, CA 91359; 805-491-3642 fax: 805-491-2393 Roger W. Tuthill Inc. P.O. Box 1086, Mountainside, NJ 07092; 908-232-1786 fax: 908-232-3804

From: "Michael Covington" mc@ai.uga.edu
Newsgroups: sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary,alt.astronomy,sci.astro.amateur
Subject: Re: Solar Eclipse Safety
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999
Thanks *very* much for posting that. Chou is the world's leading expert. One thing Dr. Chou is font of pointing out is that exaggerated warnings ("don't go outside during the eclipse") are simply falsehoods, and besides depriving people of the opportunity to see the eclipse, they undermine one's credibility.
--
Michael A. Covington - Artificial Intelligence Ctr - University of Georgia
http://www.ai.uga.edu/~mc http://www.CovingtonInnovations.com

From: cdarney@my-deja.com
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.digital
Subject: Re: Photographing the Northern Lights
I used to live in Fairbanks, AK and took pictures of the lights several times (wit a Canon AE-1; 35mm lens). The lights change over the course several hours (about 6pm to midnight. Very early they are long, horizon to horizon bands which don't move that much. These are easy to photograph. Any reasonable high speed film (400asa+) and a tripod witha cable release. I would start with 4 sec (if very bright) and work to about 12 sec. A little later these relatively static bands begin moving and "whipping" around. You can try shooting them the same way, but the exposed photo will look much different. You'll spend a lot of time explaining to friends what it looked like becuase the photo will not do them justice. A little later the bands turn to "sheets". They are dimmer and require longer exposures. They move less earlier in the process. It's quite a show to watch a 2 dimensional line become a sheet of shimmering light. The latest part of the show (around midnight) is about the best, but I was never able to shoot. This is when the lights display colors. There will be a point of light overhead that will "burst" into an area of shimmering light with, you hope, color tinting. Rare shows have very deep coloring (reds). Generally the lights are a light green/white, similar to the color of fluorescent lighting shot without flash.
Review:
If you can shoot with high speed video...do. The lights are always moving - sometimes more than others. Shooting early with high speed film and a still camera will produce the truest results. I don't know if the digital video or cameras will work better, but you should, at least get immediate results.
Good luck shooting!
...Chuck

From: Philip Stripling phil_stripling@cieux.zzn.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.misc
Subject: Re: Fire Photography
Date: 25 Feb 2000>

> I'm a beginning photographer with my first SLR. I'm going to have the > opportunity to shoot a burning building at night (in a few days) and > was wondering if anyone had suggestions as to cameral settings or > techniques.

Hi, Jeny,
I shoot at Burning Man: http://www.cieux.com/bm/bmtoc.html and select the link for images; there are four years of pictures of the burning man.
I hope your first effort allows for experiment and failure. :-)
My suggestion is to set the shutter speed to a fifteenth of a second and meter off the fire for your aperture, but take note that this may cause darker parts of building and grounds to be too dark to see in the image. I suggest a fifteenth because that let's the flames' motion make them blur, emphasizing their burningness. Completely frozen flames aren't exciting.
If you want the building to show, meter off it and the flame, and make a judgment of the best compromise exposure, or, if you have a good flash, use the flash to expose the building. The flames themselves will light a good deal of the surroundings, but a flash is always nice to soften the shadows when you show people in the pictures.
Oh, my camera is manual. If you have shutter priority, use that and set the shutter for a fifteenth. If this causes the exposure to go out of the range of the film [and the camera won't take the picture], adjust the speed up or down. I use ASA 100 and 200 film to give me the speed I need with flash in the dark, and I shoot slide film. Your mileage will vary.
Good luck and have fun.
--
Phil Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed The Civilized Explorer | spam and read later. email to philip@ http://www.cieux.com/ | civex.com is read daily.

From Panoramic Mailing List:
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999
From: Willem-Jan Markerink w.j.markerink@a1.nl
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: RE: Fireworks ?
Dave Buyens wrote:

> Flash photography wouldn't seem to work with the 202 either. Use the 202 > for interesting daytime shots.

Flash photography is a tad less problematic than fireworks....the flash problem can be solved with a stroboscobe....although you need a big one to obtain the power similar to an ordinary flash.
Fireworks is indeed a sad limitation of any swing lens camera....with a slit of only a few mm's creeping by on film, one will never get the continuous full blast on film....even a comprimise like using high-speed film and shorter shutter speeds won't work....it will result in the same boring 'static' shots as with a normal camera....the trail from start to end won't be visible.
I'd call this the most tantalizing problem of swing-lens cameras.
Btw fireworks: don't always stick to wide-angle and as many bursts as possible....my best firework shots were with 100 or even 200mm, covering only part of the 'bloom'....otherworldly, much different than what is seen by the naked eye.
Also cute, for those into IR: use Kodak Ektachrome IR without filter, especially in snow covered areas....the background will be blue (artificial lighting itself rather neutral, unlike normal film sans blue filter), while the fireworks still maintain a nice spread of colors, all in the warm range....very nice contrast, especially with a 8mm circular fisheye, one that lives from strong contrasts (because of the limited subject magnification), and covering both the entire trail from start to end, as well as a lot of surroundings.
Cool fireworks....:-))
--
Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
w.j.markerink@a1.nl
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]

Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000
From: meilaamua@my-deja.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Photographing Fireworks

>There is a very big firewoorks display where I live, and I would like to >take a few photgraphs of it, but i have never done it before, and I would

I was asking the same questions just before new years. Here's what I've learned:
- Use 100 asa print film. Or even slower if you can find it. The slower it is, the more latitude it has. Also print film has more exposure latirude than slide film.
-Use tripod and cable release. Tripod is total MUST, cable release will help and is good to have, but not a must.
- User aperatures at about 8 to 11 and exposures of 1 to several seconds. Longer the exposure time, more fireworks in the picture. I got the best pictures at around 3 seconds. Not too many rockets and not too few in one frame at 3 sec, but it really depends on the "show".
- Try to get some scenery to the picture too (not just sky). One thing to try is to set aperature at say 8, take a light reading from somewhere in the scenery, make a note of the exposure time and then manually set that time and apperature.
- Prefocus at infinity or something at the same distance you think the fireworks are fired at. Then disable autofocus and don't touch the focus ring. Or you can autofocus to the first shot and after that disable autofocus and don't touch the focus ring.
- Don's save the film and have another roll ready. I shot about 40 pictures in 10 minutes. Some were great, some where not. I have couple available at http://www.kolumbus.fi/janipa/valokuvia/
(I'm not sure, it can also be http://www.kolumbus.fi/~janipa/valokuvia/ ) Pages are in Finnish, look for "ilotulitus" or "hanubi" (hanabi?)

[Ed. note: just a gentle reminder to check out Bill's site too, or you may be missing the solution to your problems! ;-)]
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999
From: Bill unklbil@csonline.net
To: rmonagha@mail.smu.edu
Subject: Links, etc.
Bob,
Since I have referred about a half dozen folks to your moonlight landscapes page, I added a link to it on my Photo Links page under Special Techniques and General Photography.
If you would like to place my charts or equipment pages etc. on your site instead of just giving the link, feel free to do so. I'm more interested in getting the info out than worrying about whether somebody visits my pages or not. You may want to remove the links that say home - and if you want to download the camera body specs as well that are linked out of the tables, that is also fine with me. I'm sure your site gets a lot more hits than mine, maybe someone will see the info at your site before they ever even find mine.
Regards,
Bill Briggs
Home page http://www.csonline.net/unklbil/
Community page http://www.csonline.net/fisher

Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000
From: glen glenlyla@cyberbeach.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Night photos
Yes suggest you find the north star near the big dipper. Thats If you want the complete circle of stars. A 24mm lens is the best for this. To get the full cirle of star trails takes about an hour. Use fine grain film if possible. I used 64asa and had an aperture of F8. You have to photograph well out out city limits no ambient light works. Wait untill the sky is black and its a clear night. Your exposures can be as long as you want them. It all depends the effect you want. If you want to be creative take one exposure just after sunset. Then expose on top of that one same scene at night. Then if you want to go one further, try a searchlight to light up elements in your image. Say like a small tent.You are lucky where you live as its very dry. I cant do night star trail images to much moisture on clear nights.
http://www.geocities.com/glen_gaffney/

Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000
From: "Al Denelsbeck" denelsbeck@ipassonspam.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Night photos
Minumum time to show any movement would be less than a minute. Watch the sunrise or sunset some time, see how long it takes for the entire sun to appear/disappear. I achieved noticeable star trails on a 28mm lens with a 2 1/2 minute exposure. However, if you're looking for long streaks instead of little oblongs, go for ten minutes or better.
Be aware that any ambient light will show pretty clearly at this length of time. You're almost certain to get some glow on the horizon from even distant cities. Also watch for planes.
The upside is, you may also catch meteor activity.
Good luck! - Al.

Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000
From: Tony Spadaro t_spadaro@my-deja.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Night photos
The shortest I've ever had star trails show up is about two minutes also. The longest trails you can get (without being in the polar regions) are about 14 hours or significantly more than a half circle, in midwinter - at your latitude.
Here's a start on moonlit landscapes - full moon, ISO 100 film, try 5 minutes at f4, and bracket at least two stops in each direction. You will be able to refine the exposure on subsequent tries. The full moon itself is a sunlit subject - f16 at 125th for ISO 100. If you have it in your moonlit landscape, it will be a white streak.

Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000
From: "Bob Talbot" BobTalbot@st-abbs.fsnet.co.uk
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Night photos

> Here's a start on moonlit landscapes - full moon, ISO 100 film, try 5 > minutes at f4, and bracket at least two stops in each direction. You > will be able to refine the exposure on subsequent tries. The full moon > itself is a sunlit subject - f16 at 125th for ISO 100

And you will have a dull 18% grey moon. Maybe that is how it is but it is not how we see it.
For 100 ASA film my favoured exposure is f8 and 1/100th (for the full moon at high altitude.)
This makes it look brighter with virtually no loss of detail. (brighter areas well away from saturation)
The above is the result of extensive bracketing ... you want it to look like cream cheese, no?
BobT

Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000
From: "B. Buckles" buckles@home.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Night photos
The formula for a shutter speed "not to show movement" is 600 divided by the focal length of the lens in seconds. Example of a 28 mm lens would be: 600/28 or about 20+ seconds. It takes lots of time to get good star trails. Maybe 3 to 4 hours and that eats batteries with electronic shutters. The older cameras with manual shutters work best for this type of photography.
Bob

Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999
From: "Denis MacDonald" djmac@tinet.ie
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Fill the frame with the MOON!
Fill the frame with the Moon without spending a fortune on long lenses... experiment
--
http://homepage.tinet.ie/~djmac/

From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000
From: Dave Wyman mt.man@bigfoot.com
Subject: [Rollei] Dusk Photo Metering question
Howard G. Ross, who first developed the Enhancing Filter, has a tip for shooting at dusk. He suggests using an EVS value of 9 - e.g. f/8 at 1/8 sec. - at twenty minutes after sunset, at time when the faded brightness of the sky matches illuminated buildings.
Mr. Ross's advice works, even in the rain, but I suggest bracketing. Btw, Mr. Ross has information about his unusual filter (I have one and it works, too, with care) at:
http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/filters.html

Mr. Ross is very knowledgeable about photography and enjoys talking about the subject on the phone.
Dave
--
http://www.davewyman.com

From: Philip Stripling phil_stripling@cieux.zzn.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.misc
Subject: Re: Shooting fireworks
Date: 03 May 2000
Mike P mike@mpphotography.com writes:

> I have an assignment to shoot an opening event where fireworks will be > part of the ceremonies. If anyone has had some experience shooting > fireworks while getting some of the environment exposed as well, I >SNIP

I haven't looked at this page in awhile, but if it's still there, it ought to give you some helpful information:
http://photo2.si.edu/firew/firew.html
Smithsonian Photographers Shoot Fireworks
--
Phil Stripling
http://www.cieux.com/

[Ed. note: the trick of using late twilight times to balance building light and ambient sunlight is well known, but this post points it can be turned inside out... Thanks to "Zeitgeist" for sharing this tip ]
From: zeitgeist Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.misc
Subject: Re: shooting through a window
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000

> Don wrote: > > > I want to shoot through a window and have the inside around the window > > and the scene outside expose proper;y. I have tried this in the past but > > only to have created a very dark interior around the window with the > > outside being correctly exposed. Should I use flash for inside or should > > I meter off the interior window panel? I think before I just metered the > > scene through the window.

Logan McMinn wrote:

> Daylight is so much brighter than interior artificial lights (4 or 5 stops > or more isn't unusual) that you almost always have to do something to > reduce the difference. Flash is the most common solution. Another, if the > interior illumination is bright enough, is to put a large sheet of neutral > density material over the window. You can buy this material in rolls at > stores that sell professional lighting equipment and accessories for the > videotape and motion picture industry. It's rather expensive, so unless > you plan to do a lot of this sort of work, I don't recommend it. > > If you use flash inside to bring the lighting level up, try this approach: > set your flash up so that the interior is properly exposed, and that the > outdoor scene gets 1/2 to 1 stop more exposure. The outdoor scene will be > somewhat overexposed, but if you balance the interior and exterior scenes > too equally, the window may look like a painting on the wall, rather than > what it is. Although overexposed, there still should be plenty of detail > in the outdoor scene. It will probably take a couple of tries until you > get it down pat, but after that, you should be able to do it easily.

Logan's reply was what a professional would do.
I don't know if the original poster was a pro, but let's assume an amature, it is unlikely that they would have a flash powerful enough to bounce (a prefered method) and achieve an exposure of at least f/11. Nor would one spend the bucks required to get enough Neutral density filter gel to cover the windows to drop the outside exposure down to appropriate levels. Also, to do this would require a ladder (and permission if the photographer doesn't own the place) to gaffer tape (much more expensive than 'mere' duct tape) and/or stable or nail the filter gel in place. (careful you don't step on...oooh, that was a prized/expensive flowering plant.)
A simple thing to do would be to wait till sundown when the light level outside is much closer to the interior light level. It is important that the exposure is set for the primary interest, is the interior the main subject? then the outside should be over exposed by one stop or so. If the exterior is the main subject then the interior should be placed one stop below.
To make this image successful, especially if the image is to be printed from a negative, the lab must know what the 'subject' is cause they can print for one to the detriment of the other and if given a choice, I'd bet on the wrong choice to be made.
z-ProPhoto z-ProPhoto@onelist.com a professional photographer's mailing list.

From: Gene Anderson gene@designsinlight.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: night photography
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000
Scaaven wrote:

> can anyone point me to a good resource for night photography? like an > instruction/technique sort of thing? thanks

There are tips, a short FAQ list, and some nice examples at:
http://www.thenocturnes.com/
Also, there's:
http://www.lostamerica.com/how/how.html
http://photography.about.com/arts/photography/library/weekly/aa112999.htm
Be sure to check out the Links pages to other sites.
If those (and the links from them) don't keep you busy, go to http://www.google.com (or your favorite search engine) and search for "night photography" or "night photography technique" for more.
I've only done very limited photography at night, mostly variations on the "streams of headlights / taillights" you get with a long exposure of a road.
gene
--
Gene Anderson
gene@designsinlight.com
http://www.designsinlight.com/

From: "psi" argyle@netlink.com.au
Newsgroups: aus.photo
Date: Sat, 20 May 2000
Subject: Re: Night Photography
Try going to my gallery at www.netlink.com.au/~argyle you will find exactly the type of images you are after.
don't froget, to get the stars going in a circle around a point, you will need to be shooting true south at about 15-20 degrees off the horizon, if you want to include the celestial pole. flash is one effect you can use to fill in the foreground, you can also try painting it with a torch to get a warmer glow. The web page has a sample of both torch and flash shots.
ask yourself, " how long do I want the star trails?" remember that they go horizon to horizon in 12 hours, 90 deg is 6 hours, 15 degrees in one. ! hour sould be enough to make it interesting.
******* DO NOT SHOOT ON A COLD NIGHT******* your lens will get very cold, and condensation will appear in your lens, amking you r images very soft. If you do shoot on a cold night, make it earlier and keep an eye on your lens in between shots!!
I would probably shoot at around f4 or 5.6, fast enough to let star light in, wide enough depth of field for a moderat eforeground, and the optical best of most lenses!
what I would bring:
camera
tripod (sturdy)
cable release
compass ( to find the celestial pole and sunrise/set)
powerful torch
handheld meter ( if you want to accurately "paint light" with the torch)
a good lens cloth ( for condensation)
a strong flash
a fair bit of maybe 100iso film, ( this is trial and error, try a few different things)
patience
a themos (it get's bloody cold at night)
or a warm person to cuddle up to....with some luck, you won't be timing your exposures but something else!
good luck,
kosh
Joey Dale Beffy@hotmail.com wrote

> Hi, I'm new to phtography, and want to try out night photography. I'm > 18, and have an old pentax camera. I want to know how long I should > expose the film with the fstop at 16 or so, and how long at 2.82... I > also want to know how long, and at what settings to use to make one of > those pictures with the stars in bands going in circles.... if you can > be of any help, please help. > Thanks.

From Contax Mailing List:
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000
From: "Bob Shell" bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [CONTAX] Recommended night time exposure for carnivals?
General tip: color negative film is much better for this sort of work than color slide. It's greater latitude will retain detail in those brightly lighted areas without losing it in the shadows. You can always have slides made from the negatives if you need to project them.
I really like the Konica 3200 speed color neg film for this sort of photography, since it lets me work hand held or with a monopod, and this attracts much less attention than a tripod.
Bob
...

From: "Amitabh" adeshpan@tx.ncsu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature,rec.photo.misc
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000
Subject: Re: Night landscape photography
Richard,
There was this site where exactly what you are attempting was described by this person who took pictures of woods and farmland by starlight.
This site also contained a link to a site where a process of landscape photography was described using tech pan film and red filters and tripods and the results apparently compared to medium format.
I can't seem to find that site.
However this place has loads of links
http://dmoz.org/Arts/Photography/Night_Photography/
This one is interesting in a away.
http://www.sedonastarlight.com/gallery/gal_frameset.html
I stopped writing and went through a few of the articles ..they seem mostly to do with a moon in there.
Oh well. Good luck.
I'd say f11 and go from 5, 10, 15. 20 minutes and same times at f8. Burn one roll. (ASA 200 sounds good) They say Tmax 400CN has very fine grain. I have shot some night photos with Tmax 100( architecture photos) at f8 and about 4 minutesI got a decent image. ( There were lights on the building ( very few).)
Check results and next night go for it.
Good luck
Amitabh
Richard Knight wrote in message ...

>Hi everyone! >As some of you know, I live in Hawaii. I'm interested in taking some >landscapes at the beach (remote location), facing southwest, at night >without a moon. I want to include a point jutting into the ocean and want >some detail in this. I plan to start well after sunset to get an even >exposure of the sky. I'm doing this to get a very soft surf and to eliminate >the inclusion of people. I've researched the web extensively and can only >find exposure suggestions on full moon photography. I'm looking for a >starting point on the exposure (I'm arbitrarily thinking around 10 min @ f11 >or 16 - for DOF - with ASA200 chromes). Any suggestions would be >appreciated. Thanks in advance. > >Richard

From: John R Pierce spamhater@hogranch.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000
Subject: Re: shooting fireworks with med.format
"me" jahnne@shore.net wrote:

>Hello, > >I am using a Pentax 645n, and am interested in shooting fireworks. Any >general suggestions? Thanks.

use a wide angle lens. asa100 film (I get the best results with a transparency film like Ektachrome Lumiere 100X), f/8 or f/11, and time exposures ("B"). Open the shutter shortly after you here the 'whumps' of a series of launches, and close it right after the fireballs have done their thing. Get as close as you comfortably can to the launch zone. I've done this both handheld and with a tripod... the handheld shots get a nice jiggle in them. I was using a p6x7 for the Golden Gate Bridges' 50th anniversary thing.
-jrp

Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000
From: Sailor sailor@sea.world
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Fireworks Photos
There is a great article at NYIP's website:
http://www.nyip.com/tips/topic_firewk698.html
I got many tips from this article before I went to shoot fireworks last year. You can check out my pics too:
http://howiewu.freeservers.com
Howie

Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000
From: "Tony (Everyone's Internet)" lotus_design@mail.ev1.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: shooting fireworks with med.format
I am by no stretch of the term "any good at this", but here is my two cents...
I shot a fireworks show last year with my Mamiya 645. I used Kodak Portra 160 NC film (transparency film would have been better but I wanted the golden effect.) I shot with my 55mm and 80mm lenses looking for specific perspectives and angles.
Here comes my guesstimations: I wanted to get the buildings exposed properly in the picture so I metered on a building with my spotmeter and guestimated a exposure of about 15 seconds at f11 (I think this is what I used). There was a laser light show along with the fireworks and I was hoping to capture both fireworks and the lasers.
What I learned about my exposure is that it is good for a particular group of fireworks since each explosion adds more light to the film. Anyway, I shot about 3 rolls of film for the 30 minute show and I got a handful of decent prints. Unfortunately, I was close to a streetlight without any lens hoods and the glare ruined most of my prints. You would be suprised at how the glare accumulates on film if you expose the film long enough. I tried to point my camera away from the light as much as possible and I did not see any glare when I started, but it showed up on the prints. Glare was worse with my 55mm lens than my 80mm lens.
Hope this helps,
Tony
...

Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000
From: jake188NoYams@NoSpamHotmail.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Nighttime Photography
See this article by Peter Burian:
http://www.photopoint.com/community/magazine/2000/june/burianfireworks.html
The second part if the article is for 35mm cameras (The Advanced Method). I tried it, the system over all works very well, and I think the comments about catching multiple burst (3-4) per frame are good. Sometimes a single one works well too with some displays.
I did find that for my shots f/5.6 would have been better than f/8, but I didn't alter the formula at all in my first try. Next time I will know more about what I want to vary to adapt the system for myself.
If shooting from a boat you may have problem as others have mentioned. An IS lens would be very good I think to cure this problem. Otherwise your just going to have to hope it adds to the effect in a positive way.
"diznymagik" palmerm10@mindspring.com wrote:

>I am trying to prepare to take some pictures of a display of fireworks, >fire, lasers, etc. Normally, I would just use 800 >speed film and a tripod and not worry about it. The only problem is that I >will be taking the pictures from a pontoon boat that will be in calm water >and idle during the show. >So, I have heard all sorts of advice on using lower speed films >such as 50 or 100 speed film, etc. etc. > >The equipment that I have is a Canon EOS 300 (Rebel 2000), a Canon AF 28-80 >lens (f3.5-5.6), a Tamron AF 28-200 lens(f3.8-5.6), a tripod, a monopod, and >would consider >myself to be an intermediate level photographer. If anyone has any advice >on how I can capture the best pictures possible, I would appreciate it.

Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000
From: Madjid "=?iso-8859-1?Q?m=B3=B7=B9=B2?="@nospam.ca
Organization: Don't use that Email address
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Star Trails Lessons Learned - Night 2
c-tide wrote:

> I've been messing around with the same type thing lately. On the problem with > dew and fog, I tried one of the chemical heat packets hunters use as a hand > wrmer. I placed it on top of the lens' barrel to try and keep it warm. I think > it > worked pretty well, but I haven't gotten the slides back yet, so I'm not > positive. I've been reading sci.astro.amateur a pretty good bit lately and > those guys use dew heaters, which I haven't really looked at, mostly because > it's probably not really suitabel for 35mm. I hear a lot of the guy's mention > "heat ropes" which I assume is about the same thing as the pocket hand > warmers, only in a long, narrow, rope-shape instead of a square of rectangle.

Dew will condense on camera, lenses and scopes because of radiation cooling. At night equipment will try to get temperature in equilibrium with the clear sky above and be a few degrees below ambient temp. To prevent this from happening you must shield lenses and optics as much as possible FROM SKY. Dew caps" are long tubes around the scope opening (in general 2 to 3 time diameter) made of cardboard, styrofoam or any insulating material. But dew caps block and limit the view field on cameras. You can make one with black foam and velcro like this one:
http://www.astronomy-mall.com/regular/products/virgo/eight.htm
Air circulation (even cold) will limit dew. Warm air from the body works, so staying close to camera or even sitting in front of the camare/lens (and below) will create ascending "thermals" and limit dew. This is an absolute no-no with a real telescope or very long lenses because it may blur star pictures.
Another solution is an umbrella. Yes you will look foolish in the middle of the night under an umbrella (and your neighbors may call those people in white for a straitjacket) but it will shield your camera from the sky and reduce dew, unless you are shooting straight up.
Amateur astronomers use heating systems around the opening of their scope. Those "heat ropes" are in fact made with a bunch of resistors in series inside a protection tubing, or a heating element made of nichrome or even copper wire. You don't need to have a burning inferno (will crack lenses and correction plates) but just a few degrees (2-3) difference to eliminate heat loss. These heating devices consume energy and you will need a battery and sometimes an electronic pulsing device for saving energy.
http://webhome.idirect.com/~rsnow/scopeheater.html

> On the film, I've been using a slide film (Provia) and the sky color is >shifting on long exposures a little.

That is caused by reciprocity failure and spectral response of films. Fuji will often have a green cast, Kodak has a tendency to yellow/orange (slides) and blue on negative film.
Madjid

From: "Richard Knight" adreamcatcher2000@earthlink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000
Subject: Re: How do I take night time photos???
The Kodak existing light exposure tables are a good starting point. They're located at:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/consumer/pictureTaking/lighting/lightin11.shtml.
Here are more from in and around Bob Monaghan's exceptional resource site:
http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/moonlight.html

You may find these useful as well: http://www.brokentripod.com/MOONLIGHT2/LOTMoon2.html http://www.lostamerica.com/how/how.html http://www.dbphotography.demon.co.uk/ http://www.gorillasites.com/nightphotos/ http://www.thenocturnes.com/

and finally:
http://www.calphoto.com/moon.htm
These should keep you reading into the wee hours when you can then try out the techniques. :~)
Richard

From: bhilton665@aol.com (BHilton665)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Date: 03 Dec 2000
Subject: Re: Star trails/Northern Lights

>From: "Tony Morrison" motony@sympatico.ca > >I have been told that the coming months ahead will offer some of the best >opportunity to see the aurora borealis. I would appreciate any information >or websites on photographing this and/or star trails.

I was in Alaska two months ago and was told the absolute best times are during the spring and fall equinox (moonless nights of course). One of the guides at the lodge we stayed in was leading trips in October and I think next spring ...
here are some sample images from last spring ...
http://www.mosquitonet.com/~endresphoto/Nlights%20phototour%20photos.html
More info, including tips on how to shoot pics like this, at ...
http://www.mosquitonet.com/~endresphoto/Northern%20lights%202000.html (click on the 'what to bring (gear list)' link.
Good shooting.
Bill

Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000
From: Steelhead Steelhead@Ihatespam.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Star trails/Northern Lights
These sites may be of interest to you for info on predicted appearance of borealis and meteors, etc not how to take photos of them.
This one you may subscribe to (free) for info on solar flares, etc which affect borealis as they happen., meteor showers, etc

http://www.spaceweather.com/ www.sec.noaa.gov/rt_plots/kp_3d.cgi www.sec.noaa.gov/Aurora/index.html www.spacew.com/www/aurora.html www.sec.noaa.gov/Aurora/globeNW.html www.sec.noaa.gov/advisories/outlooks.html www.sec.noaa.gov/today.html

Steelhead
"Tony Morrison" motony@sympatico.ca wrote:

>I have been told that the coming months ahead will offer some of the best >opportunity to see the aurora borealis. I would appreciate any information >or websites on photographing this and/or star trails. >Thanks >Tony >Ontario, Canada

[Ed. note: regarding Christmas tree light photos...]
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000
From: "Nandakumar Sankaran" TheNandakumars@hotmail.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Need help with Christmas lights
The exposure varies a lot depending upon (1) the size of the lightbulb, (2) color of light and (3) how densely they are arranged. With medium sized bulbs and a medium density of arrangement, I've successfully photographed lights on Velvia at 1/2, f/11. The same exposure came out miserably with small light bulbs and a sparse arrangement. Unless you have lots of lights, your picture would be uninteresting. If you use print film, insist to your lab NOT to 'correct' the light and that you want the background to be a deep black. If you shoot slides, bracket in +1 stops. I prefer daylight balanced slides because the lights come out naturally looking yellowish-orange.
Nandakumar
http://www.geocities.com/concertocolors

From Hasselblad Mailing List;
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001
From: Peter Klosky Peter.Klosky@trw.com
Subject: Exposure for candles
My experience has been that to render candles, an exposure of about 1/8th at f8 or so registers them. Even 1/60 at f8 fails to show them, for me. Holiday lights are similar.
Now if there are candles or fires, setting 1/125s on the leaf shutter usually yields a realistic rendering but this is fully adjustable up to 1/500s as you know.

From Rollei Mailing List;
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001
From: "John A. Lind" jlind@netusa1.net
Subject: Re: [Rollei] fireworks
Cassandra asked:

>Since I am sure this has been covered before, feel free to email me at home, >unless we think someone else might benefit: I got inspired to shoot >fireworks last night, which I have never felt the need to do before, using >400 speed film, f/11 and a 1-second exposure. Of course this would be >starring the rollei t35. I thought I would set up my Yashica with f/8 or >f/16. This is based on some "moonshots" I did a couple of years ago and >some nice articles from some nice photo mags. ;-) Now, fortunately for me, >the fireworks got postposed due to wet gunpowder ("frog-strangler" came down >earlier in the day) so I can bug you guys for suggestion and maybe pick up >some 220 for the Yashica. Since I also have all day tomorrow to pick up that >and/or a different speed film, any advice would be a godsend. >We DID get a light-show, though, courtesy of a swarm of fireflies that >showed up at dusk. the odd thing is that I seemed to be the only person >noticing this lovely sight. >thanks for any input..Cassandra

Sorry your day got rained out. Here's my method for shooting sky displays of fireworks in 35mm format (BTW, I highly recommend using ISO 100 film!):
1. Equipment:
a. Tripod that can hold the camera vertically.
b. 35mm lens or zoom that covers this length is recommended.
c. Cable release.
d. SLOW film between ISO 50 and ISO 100
2. Method:
a. Load camera with film (always recommended).
b. Set camera to manual mode, shutter speed to "B" (Bulb) and aperture for film speed as follows:
ISO 50 f/5.6
ISO 64 - 100 f/8
c. Mount on tripod vertically oriented so you can tilt up at least 45 degrees and level the tripod. (some heads pitch more forward than backward)
d. Use the opening couple of skyrockets to aim; ensure groud clutter including street lights are not in the frame (unless you WANT them there).
e. Open shutter when you hear rocket launch and hold it open for 1 to 3 skyrockets or about 8 seconds, whichever occurs first. Close shutter and wind to next frame. More than 3 rockets usually clutters the image too much.
f. Check your aim occasionally, especially if you some winds kick up or die down during the show (they will move the rockets around a little.)
I've done this several years using Kodachrome 64 with very good results (no reciprocity failure). This year was last Saturday night in a different locale using Fuji Reala (ISO 100). If you use the Yashica with a standard focal length, don't get right on top of where the rockets are launched. Keep some distance.

Ground displays are a different strategy: ISO 50: f/2.8 @ 1/15th f/4 @ 1/8th, or f/5.6 @ 1/4th ISO 64 - 100: f/2.8 @ 1/30th, f/4 @ 1/15th, f/5.6 @ 1/8th, or f/8 @ 1/4th

Select focal length or distance from display to fill frame as desired.
Select shutter speed for how much you want to stop action of the ground display (I prefer 1/15th and slower).
Good Luck,
-- John

Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000
From: "Richard Knight" adreamcatcher2000@earthlink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.art
Subject: Re: Night photography
The Kodak existing light exposure tables are a good starting point. They're located at:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/consumer/pictureTaking/lighting/lightin11.shtml.
Here are more from in and around Bob Monaghan's exceptional resource site:
http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/moonlight.html
You may find these useful as well:

http://www.brokentripod.com/MOONLIGHT2/LOTMoon2.html http://www.lostamerica.com/how/how.html http://www.dbphotography.demon.co.uk/ http://www.gorillasites.com/nightphotos/ http://www.thenocturnes.com/

and finally:
http://www.calphoto.com/moon.htm
These should keep you reading into the wee hours when you can then try out the techniques. :~)
Richard
"Nitzan Tagansky" nitzan@nitzan.com wrote

> Can anyone recommend a good book or site or whatever relating to night > photography and estimating correct exposures? > > Thanks,

From: "Al Denelsbeck" denelsbeck@speeedfactory.net> Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature Subject: Re: Meteor Shower this weekend Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 Coffee7371 wrote... >Any tips for shooting it? With the incredible weather we're having in Nebraska >I'll be putting on my backpack and heading into the woods. Sure beats >shoveling snow. I'll be using both slide (iso 100) and print (iso 200) film. >I'd like to get some meteors without getting star trails. Throw some hints my >way if you can. > >Thanks, > >Dave Hmmm. 100 and 200 speed film, and no star trails? Only if Lady Luck has got the hots for you... In order not to get star trails, you have to limit yourself to exposures under sixty seconds, much less if you're using a longer lens (and you shouldn't). Or you gotta track with the movement of the earth - see http://www.astronomyboy.com/barndoor/manual.html. Or spring for the couple hundred bucks and get a telescope tracking motor. My advice? Wide angle (35, 28 or less in focal length), aperture 5.6 or wider, lock the camera down on a tripod, and expose for 10 to 180 minutes. Camera should be roughly pointed 45 degrees vertically, away from as much city/horizon light as possible. Aimed north will produce arcs around the North Star, so taking this into account, you can tell what kind of star trails you'll get with the direction you're aiming. Going for something interesting in the foreground (stark tree, whatever) will give some more impact, especially if you can match the star arcs to it (tricky without experimenting, so go out *tonight*). Another thing to determine ahead of time if possible, is whether the lens will accumulate condensation. This is difficult to prevent, but something to keep an eye on, since it will destroy any chance of getting meteor shots. For further experiments, try lighting your foreground with your flash sometime during the exposure, perhaps several times - you might also like a pic of yourself with star trails showing through :-). Go for faster film - the fainter stars will show up better, as well as the fainter meteors. Try for as late as possible (I haven't checked the details for this show, but best viewing times are usually after 1 am), since aircraft traffic will be at a minimum. Also, if you're experimenting ahead of time, go to www.heavens-above.com, which will tell you if you'll have any visible passes of the ISS or Hubble in your area (usually early evening or early morning). Will give you something else to aim at. Bear in mind that while either one might be about the same magnitude as a meteor (meteors vary hugely), they'll be moving 1/10 as fast, and will expose much better. This will give you an idea. By the way, my record for meteor observations is eleven in one night, but only two on any one frame of film. It's tricky. Also, if you've heard about pushing Provia 100F and using that, forget it. Reciprocity failure will completely eliminate the advantage (found out the hard way!). Good luck! - Al. -- Remove an 'E' from Speed for direct reply. Online photo gallery at www.ipass.net/~denelsbeck.
From: DaveHodge@aol.com Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 Subject: [HUG] Re: hasselblad V1 #1437 To: hasselblad@kelvin.net hasselblad@kelvin.net writes: >>Is there something helpful to read about calculating exposures in very dark situations? In 1964, Modern Photography published the "The Jiffy Calculator for Night-Light Exposures." It was copyrighted by S. P. Martin. We cut the pages out of the magazine and pasted them onto card stock to make a simple "slide-rule" calculator based on 26 different low-light situations, film speeds from 1 to 8000, shutter speeds from 1/1000 sec to 2 hours and f-stops from 1 to 22. If you will send me a specific problem you need help with, I will tell you what the calculator says. Or, you might be able to find the magazine in a library and make a copy, or find someone else who has the magazine. I have about worn out my jiffy calculator. As long as I bracket exposures, I have gotten good results with it. Hope this helps.
From minolta mailing list: Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 From: BillB800si@aol.com Subject: Night Photography Interested in night photography ? Here's a guy who picks up a used $40 manual camera and does great work with it. He also has many night photo links on his site. Go to: Lost America Night Photography http://www.lostamerica.com/lostframe.html and click on "How To Do It". Then you're on an adventure. Bill B. (USA)

From: gvravel@aol.com (GVRavel) Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm Date: 04 May 2002 Subject: Re: Night Photography Here's a good web site that got me started in night photography about 2 years ago. It served as a good starting point for me. http://www.gerardkoh.per.sg/article/nitephoto

From: "Ken" kewaynco@hotmail.com Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc Subject: Shooting Fireworks Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 I remember a short discussion on this a while back, but I paid no attention to it as I never really thought I would try. Now, I want to try Thursday night. I have did some research on this subject on the internet and found some (to me, anyway)conflicting and confusing information. Most web sites say to use 100 or 200 speed film and give suggestions for f/stops. 100 film - f/8 or f/11; 200 film - f/16. The only one I found noticably different was the Kodak page, which said use f/8 for 100 and f/11 for 200. If it doesn't matter which film you use, is there a reason you would use one speed over another? Should I ignore the Kodak page since it is different from all the other pages I viewed as to f/stop for 200 film? And if I have a choice of f/8 or f/11 for 100 film, what would be the differences in the result of each f/stop and how would I judge which one to use?

From hasselblad mailing list: Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 From: Henry Posner/B&H; Photo-Video henryp@bhphotovideo.com Subject: [HUG] Re: farm photography you wrote: >If possible I will rely on available light. I have no Polaroid (anymore) and >no flash meter. See if http://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/nighttime.html offers some ideas. -- regards, Henry Posner Director of Sales and Training B&H; Photo-Video, and Pro-Audio Inc. http://www.bhphotovideo.com

From minolta mailing list: Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 From: "Michael Hood" mhood@frontlinepc.net Subject: Re: lightning photography 100 speed slide film in manual mode, bulb, around F11 ot F16. That'll keep the dark area's black. Use a release cable, open the shutter and close after a lightning flash. This is how I do it. My friend and fellow storm chaser is awesome at shooting lightning. You might ask him about his technique in detail. In a nutshell, he covers his lens with his hand and removes it when a bolt strikes. I myself am not that fast, so I hold the shutter open no longer than around 30 seconds, then go on to the next frame :( I use the same technique that I use for fireworks and it works great.. But fireworks are more predictable since you hear them launch before they blow up in the air. Also in a storm that is very active with lightning, take car not to get hit. Remember saftey comes first. Great photograph is second. It's hit and miss no matter how you do it.. You'll burn a lot of film to get one great shot. Check out my friend Dave Crowley's website www.stormguy.com if you want to see some killer lightning shots. He's one of the best IMHO. He also shoots Minolta too :) -Mike

From: Roger leica35@yahoo.com Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm Subject: Re: night photography Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 Ilidan, First let me suggest you get a book at the library on "available light" photography as a start. This should cover the general topic you are asking about. Next I'd suggest you search the web for "exposure calculators". There is a lot of tabular and example situations that cover "night photography" and "available light" photography. Next get a tripod, sandbag, or another way to provide a firm support for several repeated exposures - you will have to bracket till you get it in mind what effect you are trying to capture, then you will have to bracket just to be sure you got it right or that your eyes haven't fooled you because the lights in the casino were dimmer than you thought. ;-) Next in the actual situation, you have to ask the question - what am I trying to capture. If it's just the pattern of lights, then you need to expose for the intensity of the exposed lights. Here if you apply your research you can make some educated guesses on the approximate intensity of the lights. Given that initial guess, I usually open up two stops and bracket generously about that exposure. The two stops are to acquire a little background detail so that the lights are "mounted" on something and the bracketing is just what you do in those situations. The indoor situations you named, IME have widely varying light levels, even from same to same (e.g. mall to mall). A light meter is very useful, and a sensitive one at that. If you don't have a reliable one in your camera, that can read the light levels in these "rooms" then you will have to experiment profusely (still not a bad idea) or acquire an electronic (as opposed to Selenium) light meter. Hand held light meters with this kind of sensitivity are typically $150 plus - and do require some research to be sure you are getting what you need for your type of photography. Before venture into additional equipment, it would be good to read again some materials on how to use an exposure meter and what it means to take and interpret and exposure reading. Many web sites have this information as well as many publications available at the camera store or at the library. This is an "art" and is what most of photography is about, interpreting light. Regards, Roger "Ilidan Stormrage" ilidan_stormrage@yahoo.com wrote: >hi guys...could you give me tips on night photgraphy?. > >what if i'm in vegas, there's a lot of lights, how do i capture it without >blurring? > >what if it's a quiet night? > >when i'm inside the church, mall, anything indoor, what's the best >shutterspeed/aperture if it's well-lighted? what if it's a little dark? > >sorry if i have too many questions...i'd appreciate your suggestions very >much.

From: "Pieter Litchfield" plitch@attglobal.net Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm Subject: Re: night photography Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 This is excellent advice! Well done Roger. I use a very sturdy tripod, a cable release, and often I use high speed (ASA 400 or greater) film at night. But there are tradeoffs. To keep people and cars out of a night cityscape, use very slow film, a very long exposure, and a very big f-stop. For example, using ASA 50 (or downrate some ASA 100), use f16 or f32, and an exposure in minutes to keep people from registering on the film. Or intermediate speeds and times may allow streaking headlights. Or very fast films and time will freeze headlights. Its all about what you want to do. Of course there is the trade off between f stop (depth of field) and speed (stop motion). There is no "right" night setting just as there is no "right" day setting. I calculate an EV using my old Luna Pro meter, and then simply trade off speed for f-stop or vice versa depending on my specific needs for the shot. You can do the same by setting your camera to full manual (if newer than mine) and once any correct combination of f-stop and speed is found to get a good meter reading, increase speed and decrease f-stop by one click each to maintain the same overall exposure. The results are the same at night as during the day. One additional suggestion - try "painting" subjects - Leave the shutter open (on "B" with a locked cable or "T") and then use a flashlight or multiple flashes to "paint" light onto the subject. I have done done really interesting shots of buildings this way. This requires a bit of experimentation to find the method that works for you. Often covered in books about night photography. ...(quotes above posting)

From: "zeitgeist" blkhatwhtdog@yahoo.com Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.misc Subject: Re: night photography Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 > what if i'm in vegas, there's a lot of lights, how do i capture it without > blurring? tripod, the heavier the better, don't bother with a cheap plastic thing that wiggles, some of those rickety things i've seen can actually amplify the vibrations of the shutter. get one with cross pieces in the middle of the legs, hang you camera bag or some plastic bags you fill with rocks, dead weight is inertia in inaction. > > what if it's a quiet night? well, I guess you won't need ear plugs? > when i'm inside the church, mall, anything indoor, what's the best > shutterspeed/aperture if it's well-lighted? what if it's a little dark? that's what light meters are for, pros use spot meters that measure very small areas from a distance, one degree (out of the 360 degree circle) and measure the darkest areas they want detail in and open up two stops (general rule of thumb with black and white) or measure an area they wish for the mid tone and hope the highlights don't blow out and let the shadows go black, hey its night time. one cool trick is to shoot at twilight and underexpose the background one stop. If you have a very sturdy tripod and can double expose you can shoot one exposure at twilight, again underexpose one stop, and another later when more lights come on, that way you have the night scene with lots of shadowed detail. way cool for city scapes. > sorry if i have too many questions...i'd appreciate your suggestions very > much.

From leica mailing list: Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 From: "Rei Shinozuka" shino@panix.com Subject: Re: [Leica] moon shots? 1. first of all, doesn't "moon shot" always imply Hasselblad? :-) 2. in _The Negative_, Adams writes about coming across the moonrise in Hernandez NM and rapidly setting up his camera: Then, to my dismay, I could not find my exposure meter! I remembered that the luminance of the moon at that position was about 250 c/ft^2, placing this luminance on Zone VII, i could calculate that 60 c/ft^2 would fall on zone V. With a film if ASA 64, the exposure would be 1/60 second at f/8. Allowing a 3x exposure factor for the filter, the basic exposure was 1/20 second at f/8 or about one second at f/32, the exposure given.... We have all seen the blank white circle that represents the moon in many photographs, primarily caused by gross overexposure. 3. what's happening is that your metering is taking in too much dark sky. if you cannot use a spot meter or other method to isolate the moon, my recommendation would be to compensate for your overexposure by shooting the moon and doubling and then quadrupuling your film EI (or exposure compensating -1, -2). if it's B&W;, perhaps underdeveloping the negative would help (Adams used water-bath development on _Moonrise_) - -rei ...

From leica mailing list: Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 From: Bill Clough bill_clough@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [Leica] moon shots? Steve--you are shooting a subjust lit by full sunlight. Therefore, the exposure for shooting a full moon, for instance, is the same exposure you would use to shoot a full-daylight exposure on earth. If, for instance, you are shooting a E.I. 200 film, you would shoot a mountain range under full sunlight at 1/250th @ f16. The same is true of the full moon--for detail of the moon itself, start at 1/250th @ f16. - --Bill Clough

Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 From: Michael R Florey n52t@worldnet.att.net To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: [HUG] Full moon Hello HUG men, If I can put in my two cents: a full moon isn't neccessarily the best time to photograph our first satellite. Actually, a half or three-quarter moon shows the terminator over the rough surface terrain (Is "terrain" correct when talking about the moon?). Craters and other surface features stand out well at the edge of the terminator. Years ago I was reading an astronomy article that showed chilling the film back with dry ice which allowed for extended exposures. Has anyone had experience with this? Mike Florey

Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 From: Manu Schnetzler marsu@earthling.net To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: [HUG] Full moon That's correct. However it is a great time to go out and take photos of the moon-lit landscape! The main problem with that type of photos is to convince people they were not taken during the day... star trails do help! Here are a few I took Tuesday morning before the Leonids meteor shower, and the only three shots with some meteor traces. I am not totally satisfied with the scans, but it will give you an idea. http://www.schnetzler.com/Leonids02/ I don't have experience with cooling down film for astrophoto but you'll find plenty of information on the web, for example: http://members.shaw.ca/jmirtle/coldcam.htm Manu ...

From Nikon MF Mailing List: Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 From: wdshpbiz@aol.com Subject: Re: Shooting outdoor Christmas Lights Bill, I use to shoot Christmas lights on a regular annual basis when I was working for newspapers. Seems every town I worked in had an annual Christmas lighting/decorating contest. Anyway, to answer your question, exposure depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Frequently, I was trying to get in the ambient scene with lawn displays as well as the lights. For that, I would expose for the average scene and let the lights become somewhat burned out highlights. That seemed to work pretty well. But you can also expose just for the lights, underexposing the scene, so the lights become an abstract pattern of color and light that floats in a dark space. A weather issue also becomes a factor. If there is snow on the ground, you may not have much choice. Snow creates a huge amount of reflected light. Exposing for the general scene may be your only real option in such circumstances because you are not likely to be able to easily "disappear" the ambient scene just to get the lights. William Sampson http://hometown.aol.com/wdshpbiz/AImod.html

From nikon MF mailing list: Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 From: Josef Brugger jbrugger@pcez.com Subject: Re: Shooting outdoor Christmas Lights Bill & Bill, My starting point for odd situations always comes out of the Kodak Photoguide, which can be turned up in used bookstores or camera stores that have been around for a while. The existing light calculator dial suggests a half-second at f5.6 for 100 speed film, which works out to EV6. I'd probably bracket a stop up and down as well. If you don't have a Photoguide, it's worth finding. They're metal spiral bound and printed on heavy cardstock. My 1975 Professional PG is about 5x7; also have a Master Photoguide from 1966 that's about 3x4. Lots of good tables and calculators for depth of field, existing light, fill flash, color correction and so on. I doubt it's still being published but one shouldn't be hard to find. Joe you wrote: > >Bill, > >For tiny lights on dark background I've noticed that the exposure has more to >do with the size and color rendition of the highlights than it does with >getting an image on film. Shorter exposures get you smaller, more defined >points of light but less color definition. Longer exposures give bigger, >potentially fuzzier highlights but with more of a color pallette. Shooting >400 film, I've actually successfully shot hand-held Christmas lights in the >neighborhood of 1/30 at f1.4 for dark scenes and stopping down a bit for >scenes with lots of light from reflected snow. > >William Sampson ...

Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 To: contax@photo.cis.to From: Daniel Galloway dan@web.turner.com Subject: [Contax] Leonid Meteor shower Anyone else thinking of photographing these? I found a decent web site on the phenomenon: http://leonids.hq.nasa.gov/ They even have a tip page for photographing them: http://leonids.hq.nasa.gov/leonids/photo.html Now I've got some forecasts for specific cities(not all are in US, either!): http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/09oct_leonidsforecast.htm also a decent article at: http://skyandtelescope.com/observing/objects/meteors/article_719_1.asp I'm thinking of: Contax Aria Planar 50mm f1.4 Fuji Provia 400 (2-3 rolls) gitzo tripod arca-swiss ballhead cable release contax no 4 lens hood bottle of ephedrine water blankets chair (lounger) I've got to find a decent (good view of eastern sky, little or no light pollution) location to observe from. Daniel Galloway

From: Brenton neuschulz@bigpond.com Newsgroups: aus.photo Subject: Re: Lightning Trigger Date: Tue, 22 Apr 200 Brian Mitchell wrote: > > Does anyone know of an Australian Supplier of a daylight lightning trigger > or have a design for one. Would a flash slave unit be able to fire a slr via > the electronic cable release? > > Thanks > Brian I know this is an old thread now... but I was searching on shutter lag of my EOS 3 to compare to the 10D and found this http://www.fone.net/~rfrankd/CameraCompatibility6/CameraCompatibility6.htm

From: "Trevor" trevor@home Newsgroups: aus.photo Subject: Re: Lightning Trigger Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 "Bob Monaghan" rmonagha@engr.smu.edu wrote > most strikes are multiple flashes or discharges over a few tenths of a > second duration, not 1/10,000th of a second as with strobe flashes - some > last over a second. Otherwise the commercial units would not work either, > and they do, if at a stiff price ;-) > > the big problem is that many cameras take 1/2 or more of a second to open > the shutter from the time the camera gets trigger pulse. Too long for many > flashes. So choice of the right camera may be very important too. Not if using a LCD controlled filter. You simply leave the shutter open and the filter changes from black to clear when triggered. These usually take less than 1/100th second. Trevor.

From: "Michael Thompson" thompson@iprimus.com.au Newsgroups: aus.photo Subject: Re: Lightning Trigger Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 Bob's correct, lightning often pulses several times, I am a storm chaser www.ozthunder.com so I like to think I know what I am talking about. I know several fellow chasers how have captured daytime lightning purely by reaction, of course to do this you need very strong lightning that pulses many times. On one rare occasion I was able to swing a video camera about 45 degrees and still catch lightning. In weak storms the lightning is often weak too and no matter how quick you are you will not catch a shot. "Bob Monaghan" rmonagha@engr.smu.edu wrote > most strikes are multiple flashes or discharges over a few tenths of a > second duration, not 1/10,000th of a second as with strobe flashes - some > last over a second. Otherwise the commercial units would not work either, > and they do, if at a stiff price ;-)

From leica mailing list: Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 From: David Young dnr@horizon.bc.ca Subject: [Leica] RE: "lag time" and the real world. Phong wrote: >Speaking of lightning photography, I was travelling and my >flight was delayed by a thunderstorm. I took the opportunity >to test my own lag time by trying to capture lightning. I >can attest to the difficulty. My meager result: >http://www.phongdoan.com/Photography/Misc/crw_5792.htm >[Canon DSLR, 28mm, 1/90 sec, f4.5, ISO 400] Phong: Considering it was daylight, you did very well. That's the whole point of a "lightning trigger". It measures the flash and reacts. However, because of the flash is so short, it's tough for a human to react in time.. and if the camera has significant lag-time, you miss the shot, no matter how fast you are. By putting the sensor for the 'trigger' in the eyepiece of the camera, it will not react to lightning outside the field of view, and so your percentage of 'keepers' goes way up. Still, you need a 'fast' camera and a winder, so you can leave the thing relatively unattended. All this, of course, is for daytime photography. At night, you can still put the camera on 'B' and wait! - ---------- David Young,

From minolta mailing list: Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 From: Robert Lynch robalynch@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Help: Cityscapes and low-light photography jojiten jojiten@yahoo.com wrote: >Do you have any tips on exposure other than the above? I normally shoot >@ aperture priority for landscapes and shutter priority for sports. >What about in low-light, should I shoot in M mode or S mode? Should >I bracket my shots? Here is some advice (with some repetition): http://www.dbphotography.demon.co.uk/Notes.html http://www.schoolofphotography.com/night/night.html http://songweaver.com/art/nightphotography.html http://photography.about.com/library/weekly/aa112999a.htm http://pages.cthome.net/rwinkler/nightphotog.htm

From: "Mark M" mjmorganReeMoov2@cox.net Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm Subject: Re: The lens is AMAZING! - forget cameras Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 "Tony Spadaro" tspadaro@ncmaps.rr.com wrote... > Okay okay the new body looks superdupersuper and all that but I don't > need 20 shots at 8 frames per second or any of that stuff. I'm always > looking for lighter lenses though and this one is a doozie - no floozie, > like my suzie she's --- ooops - getting ahead of myself > 70-300 IS DO and it is ring motor full time manual focus no rotating > front element and about the size of my current 100mm lens when at 70 mm. All > for $1299 list - knock off about $200 and you've got one hell of a deal. You do lots of night photography...right? If you ever takes shots that include bright lights in a scene, you might want to take note of Canon's own disclaimer in their description of DO implementations: "Note: If a very bright spotlight like a mercury lamp is photographed with a DO lens, a ring of light may occasionally appear around the light source, due to the imaging characteristics of the multi-layer diffractive optical element." I honestly sonder if the light would really have to be THAT bright. I've long assumed that something like this would occur--just from my own logical figurings, but here it's been confirmed. I'm not too thrilled about this compromise for less weight. What do you think? I do wonder how "bright" a light has to be for this to happen. Here's the web page: http://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/technology/diffractive.html
End of Page

Photograph	Settings
Star Trails (moonless night)	1.5 to 8+ hours
crescent moon color in foreground	1-2 hours
half full moon	1/2-1 hour
half full moon + 1-2 days	20 to 45 minutes
nearly full moon 3-4 days prior	10-20 minutes

ASA 100-160 Film Recommended Exposures
subject	exposure
streets	1/60, f/2
night club and theatre districts brightly lit	1/60, f/2.8
neon and other lighted signs	1/60, f/4
christmas lighting	1/2, f/4
flood-lighted buildings, fountains, monuments	1/8, f/2
skyline - distant lighted buildings	1, f/2
skyline - 10 minutes after sunset	1/60, f/4
fairs, amusement parks	1/30, f/2
fireworks, on ground	1/60, f/2.8
fireworks, in air	open shutter, f/11
fires, bonfires, campfires	1/60, f/2.8
lightning	open shutter, f/8
landscapes by moonlight	15 sec, f/2
snow scenes by moonlight	8 sec, f/2
full moon	1/125, f/16
half moon	1/125, f/8