That stinks.
That stinks.
Chadwick
MRA #825
"You live more for five minutes going fast on a bike like that, than other people do in all of their life." - Marco Simoncelli
Actually, it's incredibly easy to do with a digital camera... just hook up an intervalometer, set your imaging parameters (shutter speed, ISO, etc.), point your camera at an area of the sky you want to capture, start the captures, and get yer ass back in the car with a warm cup of cocoa!!!! If you let it run long enough to take a couple hundred photos, you're bound to score some good ones!Originally Posted by Sleev
KAPOW!
and for those who do not have "intervalometer", you can get away with a remote control. Got to have a good tripod too. Mine Sucks.
does that fix thermal noise? I was reading loong exposures with digital cameras result in thermal noise
Last edited by Sleev; Thu Nov 18th, 2010 at 03:12 PM.
I have no idea what you're talking about.
DAAWWWW PUPPEH!!
When life throws you curves, aim for the apex
Current stable: 09 Thruxton \ 09 FZ6S2 Sold List: 97 Ninja500R, 03 SV650K3, 01 Ducati 750Sport, 73 CB350/4, 03 F650GSA, 08 Gixxer600, 03 Gixxer600, 91 VFR750F, 09 KLX250, 06 Thruxton 900, 02 VFR800, 08 Spyder RS, 12 Street TripleR, 09 KLX250S, 16 KTMRC390, 10 F650GS
my Facebook, SpeedShots
Those are great, tarbash!
I have no idea what you're talking about.
Thermal noise? Do you mean luminance noise?
Luminance noise is more related to ISO than exposure length - although they work together. Also, noise isn't specific to digital cameras; high ISO films suffer the same problem, although then it was referred to as "grain".
But yes - high ISOs can result in noticeable, and sometimes problematic, noise. This is a function of how the camera amplifies light on the sensor at high ISOs, which is dependent upon its firmware (which are propriety and closely guarded secrets of each manufacturer). A lot of the newer cameras can handle very high ISOs without a lot of noise (see Canon 5D MarkII, Nikon D7000, etc.).
High ISOs result in short shutter speeds, even with night photography. So if you crank a Canon 5DmkII up to an expanded ISO of 25,600, you will likely have a very short shutter speed, resulting in a lot of noise. While modern software can almost eliminate noise (see Lightroom v.3), there are tricks to avoid it. By setting a lower ISO and a longer shutter speed, the sensor is exposed for a longer duration to the available light (instead of having to amplify it). This results in reduced noise.
So lower ISOs with longer exposure times actually improve noise performance. The downside to this is, you will deal with star movement. So if you are trying to capture stars in a fixed position - which typically requires an exposure of LESS than 30 seconds - you will need a pretty high ISO, and a damn good camera (see the Nikon and Canon models noted above).
Guess I've got some experimenting to do.
This is the article I was referring to:
" If all you have is a digital camera, then give it a try. Otherwise, use a film-based camera instead. The reason for this is that digital cameras suffer from thermal noise during exposures of more than a second or so. That's why CCD cameras designed for astrophotography have built in Peltier coolers"
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...s/meteor.shtml
meh
I have no idea what you're talking about.
Anything can be fixed in Photoshop.
You do realize that was written in 2001, right? Digital cameras have come a long way since then. And them suggesting using a film camera should tell you something right there.
Chadwick
MRA #825
"You live more for five minutes going fast on a bike like that, than other people do in all of their life." - Marco Simoncelli
This is great. Is that true out of camera DOF, or postprocessing?
Ya out of camera DOF.
MotherGoose is right... that article is very old (with respect to digital camera evolution). Also consider that no high end digital cameras even use CCD anymore these days- they are all CMOS sensors. That may be why I don't even know what he means by "thermal noise"; it is likely an artifact limited to old CCD technology. I think the small point-and-shoots still use CCD sensors, but you won't find them in any pro-level or pro/enthusiast camera these days. CMOS pwns.
Noise control has come a VERY long way since 2001.
Got my goat! Quandary Peak over a foggy Labor Day weekend 2008.
Cheap-ass Canon Powershot S3-IS I bought in 2006.
'09 Duc Monster 696
'00 Suz SV650 (Dad's, garaged with mine)
I like mountains because they make me feel small.
That's my big head on the left in the first picture, +5 internets to anybody who can identify each of the following:
1. The Vehicle
2. Guy in the White Shirt
3. Guy in the Black Shirt
'12 BMW S 1000 RR
'11 Suzuki V-Strom DL-650 *SOLD*
'07 Aprilia RSV R Factory *SOLD*
Did someone say goats?
Chadwick
MRA #825
"You live more for five minutes going fast on a bike like that, than other people do in all of their life." - Marco Simoncelli
I'm sure you all recognize this wonderful man.
'12 BMW S 1000 RR
'11 Suzuki V-Strom DL-650 *SOLD*
'07 Aprilia RSV R Factory *SOLD*
Ok so it sucks as a panorama shot, But you get to see the whole island.
MRA Racer No.427
y, was looking for date, but you must have better eyes than me. figured that could have been a factorAnything can be fixed in Photoshop.
You do realize that was written in 2001, right? Digital cameras have come a long way since then. And them suggesting using a film camera should tell you something right there.
I have no idea what you're talking about.
Some more wedding shots...
Last edited by Mother Goose; Mon Nov 22nd, 2010 at 09:46 AM.
Chadwick
MRA #825
"You live more for five minutes going fast on a bike like that, than other people do in all of their life." - Marco Simoncelli
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
