Aurora 3/16, 3/17

[jwmiller33]

Did anybody get out and capture pictures of the northern lights on Monday and Tuesday night of this week? It's not very often that we get two strong storms like that on back to back nights. It provided people with ample photo opportunities across not only MN but all over the midwest.

[eyeguy 54]

lots of good pics showing up online. would have been nice to see!

[Dbl]

Unfortunately I've been traveling all week. Made me sick when my phone started going off with alerts!

[jwmiller33]

I'm extremely new to photography but I did manage to get out on St Patty's day and it was my first time shooting exposure pictures. I was pretty happy with the way they turned out. I'd love to get some constructive criticism since I am so new to this. I was going back and forth between 25 and 30 second exposures which I now think were a little too long (the stars got streaky and I wish they were more clear). I was also flipping between ISO of 800 and 1600 (1600 is max on my camera). Aperture was 4.5 if I remember correctly and I did not switch that at all. Here are a couple of my favorites from that night.

[Dbl]

Well I think you did well for your first time with aurora photography! I am guessing you were not using a DSLR, I couldn't pull any EXIF data from the shots but based on your highest ISO capability I made that assumption.

You do have some noticeable noise in these, especially the first shot. Did you post process these at all or are they right out of the camera? Easier to help you with that once I know. I do see some star movement as well, the longer shutter speed causes that. You may not have had much choice based on your equipment.

Typically when the aurora is really going ISO 800 or 1600 is more than adequate. I have shot some that were at those ISO's and only had 5 or 10 second exposures. My typical setup for the camera is as follows;

-Widest aperture the lens is capable of. Take advantage of its light gathering ability, it allows you to shoot lower ISO's reducing noise! Depth of field is not an issue, you are shooting an object thousands of miles away! Once your aperture is set you do not need to change it again even with changing light.

-ISO and length of exposure are now the only two things I change when shooting. Length of exposure is constantly changing with aurora but I try and keep it under 25 seconds. This is somewhat based on focal length of your lens but keeping it under 25 seconds generally keeps the stars sharp showing no movement. Now I just adjust ISO to get the exposures I want. Shoot and check camera, adjust ISO to get the proper exposure. If you are to dark adjust your ISO up to get a bit more light. If too light adjust your ISO down.

Pretty simple really. Try and get the best exposures you can in the camera, don't count on fixing it latter. You will have noise issues! Remember you camera will see light that the naked eyes can't. You will often be surprised to see lights that are barely visible to the naked eye.

Of course when they are really going like this past week that is not really a problem! You have a great start here keep it up! It is a blast to get out at night and get Milky way, aurora, and meteor shots!

[jwmiller33]

I was using a Canon that is one of the earlier DSLRs (I'm not sure the exact model off the top of my head but I could tell you later when I am home). I'm not sure what you mean by pulling EXIF data but that may be because I had to manually convert the files to JPEG using a web site. This is because when I tried to put the images on my computer, they came over in a ".CRW" format that I couldn't open/view on my macbook nor my work laptop (windows). One person I talked to said you can change the file format in the camera settings but I played around with the settings and was not able to find a feature that allowed me to have the images saved as a different format. Like I said, this was literally my first time ever using this camera (was given to me as a gift). Do you have any suggestions on the image format? Or a program for viewing them? I don’t have photoshop but I’m assuming this would be a program that would work but I’d rather not spend the money on the program.

The lens on the camera is a 28-200mm, so not exactly ideal for these types of shots. I am currently looking at buying a new lens… Something along the lines of 11-16mm. Essentially I would like to be capture more of the scene in my shots. Do you have any input on this type of lens?

I did not post process or edit the pics at all. They are straight from the camera with the exception of me converting them from .CRW to .JPEG. Perhaps when I converted them, I lost some image quality?

So if I’m understanding you correctly, the higher the ISO, the more “noise” I will get in the pictures? If I wanted the sky to be darker in these shots, should I be adjusting the ISO down?

[MN Shutterbug]

You can change the settings on the camera to shoot images in just jpeg by going to settings and then quality. You can also shoot in both .crw and .jpg. The .crw files are the raw image with no in camera processing and it does take specific editing programs to open them. Being new to this, I'd recommend changing to just large jpeg. Any editing program will open them and the camera typically does a decent job of processing them.

The smartest thing you can do is sit down and read the manual, and then read it again with the camera next to you while playing with the different settings. The more you know about your camera the better your images will be.

[MN Shutterbug]

To answer one of your last questions, yes, the higher the ISO the more noise. Take some shots at ISO 400, 800, 1600 and 3200 of the same subject and you'll probably notice significant differences, especially going from 400 to 3200. Also, you will get much more noise if you underexpose the shot, especially when trying to lighten it up in processing. The grain really pops out then.

I can't answer your last question as I have never done any outdoor night shooting.

[Dbl]

Or a program for viewing them? I don’t have photoshop but I’m assuming this would be a program that would work but I’d rather not spend the money on the program.

The lens on the camera is a 28-200mm, so not exactly ideal for these types of shots. I am currently looking at buying a new lens… Something along the lines of 11-16mm. Essentially I would like to be capture more of the scene in my shots. Do you have any input on this type of lens?

So if I’m understanding you correctly, the higher the ISO, the more “noise” I will get in the pictures? If I wanted the sky to be darker in these shots, should I be adjusting the ISO down?

Let me try and answer a few of your points. There are a few programs that are free for editing and viewing your files available on the Canon site. DPP or Digital Photo Professional and Image Browser EX are good for basic editing and viewing of most file types. All you have to do is input the serial number of your camera if I recall to download the software. For a small amount of money you can purchase an older version of Photoshop Elements. A very good program that will grow with you as you become more familiar with processing your files.

A very cheap starting landscape lens is the kit lens that comes with most Canon cameras, the 18-55mm. It does a very credible job until your needs change. You can easily purchase it used for well under $100. Another high quality lens that is a perfect landscape, night photography lens is the Rokinon 14mm. It has a fixed aperture of f2.8 but it is manual focus only. It will not autofocus but for most landscape and night photography that is not an issue at all. High quality results for around $350. That would be further down the road as you get more familiar with your equipment.

Yes as you increase your ISO you will also increase the noise visible in your files. Older cameras such as yours show fairly obvious noise at 800 to 1600 ISO. The newer cameras will show about the same amount of noise at much higher ISO's such as 6400 or even 12,800 ISO. If you wanted to darken your skies you would select a lower ISO. If you want lighter skies with more stars visible for instance you would dial up your ISO to a higher number.

[MN Shutterbug]

As mentioned, Photoshop Elements will do all you need to do and much more. That's all I've been using for years and can't see needing anything costlier. I've always got my programs off the e bay. You can probably pick up an older version for $40 or less. Just make sure it's compatible with your version of Windows. I have version 5.0 which is the oldest version that will work with Win7. There are also a couple programs you can download for free. One is Gimp and the other Picasa. I prefer Elements over Gimp though due to the fact that I'm used to Elements having used it for several years. The only reason I have Picasa is so I can edit the raw files from my Panasonic.

[eyeguy 54]

pretty pics and thx for sharing. I really like the elements also. easy to use for basic editing.