Crickson's electric eye

by crickson

user profile | dashboard | imagewall

« older newer »

I am married to Spiderbaby and live in Banbury, Oxfordshire after eight years living in the USA and Sweden. I am working and training as a clinical scientist for the NHS in Oxford.


There are now over ten years of photographs on my blog! It all started with a photograph I took on the 1st of May 2004... It's been a wonderful journey, thank you all who have shared it with me, and made this blogging community one I keep coming back to!

Interesting things I read recently:

"Only one in five people born [in the UK] since 1975 believes in God".
Source: Prof David Voas, University of Essex

"For every dollar invested in the Human Genome project, $141 was returned to the US economy". Francis Collins, NIH
Source: New Scientist 27 July 2013.

I am Pavlovs_dog on PSN and would be happy to link up with Playstation-owning mobloggers : )

Too Much Information: The first album I ever bought was the Fraggle Rock soundtrack. Pretty cool, eh? I was only 16 : )





Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License

Search this moblog


Recent visitors

First aurora of the year

(viewed 1053 times)
Bookmark and Share
It should be a good year for aurora. I'm disappointed with these shots though. I set the focus to infinite but the stars are quite out of focus. Perhaps because of the twinkling of the stars and the 10-20 second exposure length? Possibly I should have a narrower aperture and longer exposure? Any tips?
12th Sep 2014, 23:27   | tags:,,

mat says:

Er. Hmm. At infinite focus and 10-15s exposures, you should just about have point images for the stars. With longer exposures you'll see trails not fuzzy points, I'd say you've got a focus issue here. But if you've double checked focus and it's OK it could be camera shake although it's a little uniform for that.

What camera are you using? I used to find my Nikon DSLR was quite bad for mirror shake. Some DSLRs let you lock the mirror up so if you can, do that.

For aurora I'd probably go for wide aperture and the highest sensitivity you can use without noise. Shoot raw, process by hand - you can stretch a couple of extra stops that way if you have to. Maybe even try shooting a number of images (quickly- the stars are moving!) and using Registax or something to stack them, see how that works out? (registax is free, I think)

The other option is to stop way down, low ISO, maybe even an ND filter or two and go for really long exposures. Aim at polaris for neat circle effects.

15th Sep 2014, 23:33

crickson says:

I am using a Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 with the 14-42 kit lens. I'm worried the lens might be broken in some way as I did expect this set up to work. As you recommend I was using the widest aperture setting and an ISO of 800-1600. I wasn't using a tripod but resting the camera face-up on the ground.

The only explanation I can think of is that I'm living in some sort of Truman Show style world and the stars are actually much closer to me than I think. If this is true, I can only apologise to you all for the mundanity of my life.

17th Sep 2014, 14:18

Dhamaka says:

woo-hoo!
you'll have loads of time to get nice ones later, sorry the camera's not behaving

18th Sep 2014, 14:49

LynnDouglas says:

Im looking forward to seeing more of these!

20th Sep 2014, 02:14