Took this star shot and caught a falling star!

[Danudin]

Was trying, night shots on Saturday, and was surprised at the number of stars visible using just the 18-70mm lens set at 18mm in night landscape mode. And was even better pleased to spot a shooting star near the top right hand corner. When I went to edit it I noticed a lot of noise that I couldn't seem to clear in PSE5. Could someone in the know please advise me as how I could improve chances of getting another serendipidous shot without so much noise?
Thanks Guys
Ron
2732
As downloaded.

2733
Auto selected in Editor

[Not4wood]

As you see, it all depends on the settings.

You have 2 choices to make when shooting that will really effect the noise level.

1 is the longer time exposures will over heat the pixels on your sensor and they will show up as dots (grain on our older Film Days).
2 is the Higher ISO settings will end up doing almost the same thing. The sensor is overheating trying to look around and capture anything that it can see and again will overheat and create those dots called noise.

I have looked and I have never seen a freeware Noise Reduction add-on for either Elements or the CS Line. There are however a few choices to make if you want to pay for them.

Noise Ninja http://www.picturecode.com/
Neat Image http://www.neatimage.com/ and
Nik Software http://www.niksoftware.com/dfine/en/entry.php

are I think are the top offered.

[Danudin]

Thanks for the quick response Mark, and the second link seems likely to be of use if the plugin works on elements. I think that I have read enough of your advice (and others) to realize that there would be some tool somewhere, to do the job. I did think it likely though, that there might be some benefit in using the "M" mode with a bulb setting or even "S" mode with fixed aperture settings that would do a better job than the auto "Night Landscape" setting. Just looking to improve my knowledge, and using "M" has enabled me to come up with some pretty good flower shots (recent gallery uploads), (My Opinion only). However fluking that comet (Shooting Star) has whetted my appetite for similar or better if I am lucky and hoped to maximize the result in camera (Not a Legal term mind), so thought others may have been down the road. Never met you but consider you a friend for the help you continue to provide.
Ron

P.S. I forgot to add the relevant data, here it is:

ISO 200
Focal / L 38mm
F stop f/5.6
Exposure 25 seconds

[Not4wood]

Ron,

It all depends on the camera and what the manufacturer has in mind when it gives out the programming for each individual camera. Some of the P&S and also the advanced P&S cameras are a bit better in what the cameras brain can see and understand then the DSLR cameras brain. The DSLR on average has a larger sensor and that gives them automatically a better level of quality over a P&S.

Now, to not get into the argument! I've taken, and have seen some very wonderful images from P&S cameras. The Noise levels for these smaller sensors are horrible when let to get out of control. I know on my P&S If I Zoom out I must keep it simple and in lens zoom. If I should go to Digital Zoom the Noise Levels just run rampant and the image is so degraded that its almost unusable.

Manual or semi-Manual is the way to go. In my camera I do have some or limited Noise Control functions. I have set and used them but truthfully, I cant see a difference for the images whether I had it on or off. I dont think it did anything and I had to try and remove the noise in Adobe anyway.

[Danudin]

Not sure of your advice here as I have the following equipment:
Nikon D70s Nikon 18 - 70 lens + Sigma 70 - 300 lens
And not a point and shoot that I am currently using. But if I read between the lines correctly, you advise keep on trying and try to find out what works best. Trust me Wilco. This is becoming the fun (maybe wrong word) part of photography. Thanks again and I will revisit the links you provided.
Ron

[Not4wood]

I'll be honest with you, I just looked at what I wrote and I think I was trying to compare the Noise Levels of other cameras and to at least get you going into the direction of going further with Post Processing.

Otherwise, I am tired, its been a very long week and I can't seem to remember what the * @ $ _ I was saying.... :o

I am also having a discussion with someone else about Sharpening, that its the nature of the beast. Noise, Sharpening its all part of the Workflow and something that we have to try and get used to in overcoming part of the process to make our images look good..

[Danudin]

Mark, too easy when you juggle so much help to us and the reply had lots of good stuff in it that WILL mean something to me further down the track, I pick up specks of gold where ever I find them! I am really rapt in the improvement that you guys have enabled mME to achieve "Who'da Thunk it Mrs Plunkett?"
You just keep being the wise man sitting on high and leave it to us to decypher the meanings!

Thanks muchly Ron

[Not4wood]

Haha, your being too kind!

[Danudin]

My penchant for night photograhs has yielded another gift.

I know that this is out of focus but I have been trying for over a month to get just this shot.

Now all I have to do is get it in focus.

As you can make out it is a flying fox(Fruit bat) and I never saw him until I checked on the computer

[Howie]

Hi Dunedin,
My friends reckon I am a conspiracy theorist, NOT TRUE! Just Paranoid ! I think we should be told! Why does this crittur look just like ET?:D
Seriously, nice shot.
Howard

[Not4wood]

I say since this image is so out of focus you might have a piece of dirt on the lens.

Try using manual focus and opening up your f: stops at least two more for more light.

[Danudin]

My practice at the time this was shot was a series of shots that included firstly, a daylight exposure followed rapidly by a night portrait using flash then a night landscape shot, followed fairly rapidly by the reverse order then back to the original order. My hope was to get a good shot of the moon (Daylight exposure then two chances of a shot involving stars along with the moon the night portrait was a hope of snapping a fruitbat which fly over most nights at a height of around 12 - 20 feet and I hoped for some flash illumination to help. At the time of this shot the moon was directly overhead so what with wind movement and other influences etc. some focus problems proved to be the norm rather than the exception. As the moon is lower in the sky now I hope to have much better success at being able to focus, but might just give the night portrait option a miss, and try two shots only. I'm loving the night shots but the neighbours think I am nuts, and Sally is starting to side with them. Howie thinks that it looks like E.T but I Just ain't that Lucky!

May not get the shot I want but will persist and not just go to where they are swarming as I feel the single bat will be more effective. You may be right Mark but the shot immediately before and after both show no evidence of dirt, so I will go on believing in Bats around the Moon Does that make me a Lunatic or a Lunabat?
Ron

[Not4wood]

Ron,

I see you have the Sigman 70-300 and also a Tele Extender. Is this what your shooting the Moon with? If I had an extender on my Nikon 70-300 thats what I would try.

[Danudin]

However Mark,
The two new (Used) Nikon lenses mention in the manuals that they are "Not suited to Teleconverters" so although I feel the Nikon 55-200mm is likely to become the most regularly used lens on either camera, I am loathe to use it with the teleconverter. Is the Nikon assertion true or just hype to maintain the integrity of the photos for reference purposes..

When I use it with the Sigma lens, I do have to adjust for the darkening of the image, but will use it for long distance animal shots and Moon shots. When the moon gets closer to the horizon (and focusing becomes easier) I am fairly certain that the two new lenses will give better results for my hoped for BAT/MOON shots.

You call it an extender, do I have the right terminology.
Ron

[Derry]

Ron, in photo 2 that is a comet you have captured,, shooting stars do not leave the trail as your photos displays,, stars leave a trail about the same size in width as they are visible,, your photo has a growing trail (tail) which is a sign of a comet,,

I can barely see the trail on my HD screen in the first photo as posted,,

Derry

[Danudin]

So I guess I knew that, without knowing how to express the detail all I tried to do was let everyone know of my excitment at capturing a shot of it, maybe you could explain how the details would change if I either lengthened or shortened the exposure time, when trying to fluke another one. I don't know whether to nurture my addiction to night photography or to my new passion playing with Wendys Orb Tut.

Why must life be so complicated, oh hang it I just won't sleep, I'm sure the wife won't mind.

Ron

[Derry]

Ron, would certainly recommend a few more nights shooting to see what the equipment is fully capable of,, it can get addictive trying to capture items your eyes cannot see,, try the belt of Orion "if available" as there is considerable color and material to capture,,

you have a brief limit of camera time on astro photos or the images will start creeping when mounted on a normal tripod if you do not have availability to an astronomy equatorial tripod that will follow the star across the sky then you will be limited on what you can capture,, if only a regular tripod is available I would recommend the following,, all done in manual mode with a remote release or mirror lock up a couple seconds before shutter release,,

start at about 400/800 ISO and do a photo sequence of say five photos and start with the lens wide open and then go two f stops smaller and take another photo,, after each set of photos increase your exposure time up to a max of about twenty seconds,, if you want to see some star trails try a couple minutes or more of Bulb exposure if the camera offers,, the cameras chip will heat up a tad on the longer exposure but if the camera offers the set up it should be fine,,

you can use your widest lens and then progress to your highest MM long lens,,

this will offer you a bench mark to pixel peep and see what f stop and time frame seems to be offering the most visible items with the lowest noise,,

you can go higher on the ISO but many cameras really start inducing considerable noise when you use one second or longer exposure,, if your camera has good noise reduction would certainly give a try with and without it on to check the results,,

as you can see trying to grab some decent astrophotographs can be a challenge but just stick with it and you will be surprised as well as impressing others,, nice thing about digital is you can shoot several hundred photos and see them quickly to make adjustments,,

if the camera is doing good on controlling the noise level then try a higher ISO level using the same pattern,,

you can also check out all the offerings by Google,,

astrophotography with a dslr camera (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GGIK_enUS269US269&pwst=1&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=astrophotography+with+a+dslr+camera&spell=1)

there are good recommendations without using a telescope you can read for more helpful tips,,

good luck,,

Derry

[Danudin]

I printed out your last Derry because overcast skies prevented photography for the last few nights, and I really only had time to take 20 shots of Venus (Should it appear round - even if it is close) With my Nikon 18-55mm VR lens ISO @ 400 exposures ranging in gammut 1 to 10 seconds duration fstop f/5.3 to f/11 skipping 1 fstop each time.

The results showed Venus in all photos without enhancement but not a companion star quite close by. The auto edit function showed not only that star but other orbs I was not aware of with the naked eye.

Once in editor the use of the Enhance/autosmartfix showed even more but there was a predominance of noise, but also showed up some dust motes on my sensor, which I have cleaned and will run another test tonight Clouds not withstanding.

I will hopefully work with a greater star field than last night, but intend to go back to Venus with my Sigma 70-300mm lens and 2X teleconverter to see it it is round or if the lens was out of focus last night.

Hope you didn't think I had forgotten, But even King Canute couldn't turn back the tide.

Ron

[Derry]

Ron, yes Venus should appear round even if only a small dot on the print,,

http://www.nineplanets.org/venus.html

another good site to visit space,,

http://www.worldwidetelescope.org/

Derry

[Danudin]

As promised to Madcap for providing the link showing a similar Bat shape against the moon to the one I posted, Whilst down in the Botanic Gardens at Redcliffe, I snapped this one at fairly close Quarters.

[MadCap]

Thanks Dan!



As promised to Madcap for providing the link showing a similar Bat shape against the moon to the one I posted, Whilst down in the Botanic Gardens at Redcliffe, I snapped this one at fairly close Quarters.