Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Sony

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 30, 2005, 7:36 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 19
Default

The time-lapse will only work if you're able to expose the same frame of film (or digital sensor) for a long enough time (a couple of hours). With a DSC-F828 you're limited to 30 seconds and your picture is put in memory. The next 30 seconds will result in a new picture and so on. Taking two pictures per minute you're have 240 pictures after two hours of effort. Combining all of them (here comes Photoshop) will result in something similar to the long -exposure picture of the sky.
sjlivson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2005, 2:20 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 182
Default

You're right. I see where the Photoshop comes in. I thought the poster meant to fake a picture with Photoshop.
kski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2005, 8:03 AM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 8
Default

It's imposible to obtain a such image with 30s exposure time.

...but you could experiment a lot of shot on the sky. :-)I've a DSC-V3 too and i like to capture the constellation. I've staked 3 images centered on the stars, so the landscape are blurred : http://sonyv3.free.fr/night.jpg. If you staked x images centered on the landscape you will see the begining of the rotation... A 30 s exposure already shows trails on the stars.


jeff31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2005, 10:20 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
tswen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 379
Default

Folks, it's just a simple long exposure (if you have a camera that supports Manual exposure times)

I've heard of some strange answers for this one. But here is the way to do it, without any software help

LONG EXPOSURE!

The first thing you have to do, is have a digital camera that can be programmed for ANY shutter time. If you don't own one (most dSLR's produced today support BULB exposure settings)
then yes, you will have to use software compilers.

Standard night sky around midnight, WITHOUT moon.

Shutter Time: 2 hours - 5 hours depending on camera and aperture, and location on earth

Aperture, i would use an aperture of 3.5-5.6

ISO: 100 (50 if you have it)

If you have noise reduction software, USE IT.

And NO, the stars moving in a circle, is NOT a photoshop trick, it actually happens. The earth moves on it's axis, and the stars will move in a circle motion. the ONLY star that will not move (only slightly during certian times of the year) is the North Star, as it is right on the earth's axis.

-Travis-

-Travis Swentosky-

tswen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2005, 11:55 PM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11
Default

Im sure it can be done, but I belive this is a doctored pic with the foreground (trees and house) being pasted on a background.

Reasons

1. The tree leaves are wayyy to sharp for this long of a shutter time. You mean to tell me there wasnt the slightest of breeze or animals flying around to move these leaves????

2. If you look close enough at the pic, there are some stars that havent even moved!

3. Length of some of the star (trails) are inconsisstent. Closer to center, trails should be shorter. If you look carefully, there are several inner lines that far exceed length of some outer trails lines!

Just my opnion!
GVales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 18, 2005, 12:07 AM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 73
Default

The reason for some stars not moving at all, could be due they're being very, very far away.
Manolito_Mystiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 18, 2005, 6:31 AM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 8
Default

Manolito_Mystiq wrote:
Quote:
The reason for some stars not moving at all, could be due they're being very, very far away.
:shock::O:?
jeff31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 18, 2005, 9:08 AM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11
Default

Manolito_Mystiq wrote:
Quote:
The reason for some stars not moving at all, could be due they're being very, very far away.
Nope! Doesnt matter! If you mean like when you are in a car and you look out the side window and the foreground is moving faster than the background...nope....cause all the stars you are looking at are far far away-so far that you cannot percieve the depth.
GVales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 18, 2005, 9:52 AM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 14
Default

They are beyond the horoptor.
xksrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 18, 2005, 4:09 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 20
Default

GVales wrote:
Quote:
Manolito_Mystiq wrote:
Quote:
The reason for some stars not moving at all, could be due they're being very, very far away.
Nope! Doesnt matter! If you mean like when you are in a car and you look out the side window and the foreground is moving faster than the background...nope....cause all the stars you are looking at are far far away-so far that you cannot percieve the depth.
I think you are wrong. For example the Sun rays will reach Earth in about 8 minutes. So travel from Earth to Sun is 8 minutes(speed of light)long. So the further the star is, the longer it will take it to "move". Its like in broadcasting, you have actual event, and if you are broadcasting it,the transmition is slower. Same in space. When you look at stars you are looking into past.:roll: going back to the future:bye:
midnightclub is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:55 PM.