My first sucessful (I think) constellation photo.......

[Azelfafage]

.....................after about 60 attempts with my new Canon camera.

(I found BTW, that's it's terribly useful to actually try & focus the thing before you start snapping ).

Brief technical details:

Location - my back garden

Time - 21.24 last Sunday

F-stop = 3.5

ISO = 800

Exposure - single shot, 1 second (I know I need longer, really, but I was Under Orders not to spend too long out there .

Camera + tripod as per signature.

Done as jpg and raw file (but I'm only allowed to post jpg, it seems)

Would welcome comments, but 1 question occurs in the meantime before I retire for the night , does anyone think the image would be better with the houses cropped out, or not?

Thanks in advance.

A

[kendg]

Not bad at all for a first attempt.

To improve,

more stars (longer exposure time), less houses 

Word of warning, when you get better pictures you'll get hooked. Then it will be a scope, mount, bigger scope heavier mount and so on.

   Quit now, beyond here there be dragons   

[MarsG76]

We'll put kendg.... I agree, From Here on is where your addiction will start...

[wxsatuser]

Not to bad for one second.

As to framing, you can frame with anything but imo, in this case the eye is drawn to the bright

houses, if they were in shilouette?

Here is one I did with the Plough, low down through some shrubs.

It's not perfect, most photos never are.

[Pete Presland]

A nice start to your imaging journey. Assuming you are using the kit lens, you can increase the exposure to around 15-20 seconds before you get any trailing. You will be amazed how many stars will be in your image! Also there is no substitute for dark skies as well

As for the file type i save all mine as lossless PNG's which can also post on here as long as they are not too large (20MB max)

[baggywrinkle]

Good start and as bunnygod says increase the exposure time. I find 20 secs with a 20mm focal length avoids trailing.

There is a rule of thumb which says divide 400 by the focal length of the lens you are using. The 400 rule allows the use of cropped (smaller) image chips used in cameras like the Canon 600,700 series. If you have a camera with a bigger chip then you can use a 600 rule.

So in my example above it would allow 16 secs, as you increase the focal length it gets shorter.

Another influence is how close to the Pole star you are working. Circumpolar constelllations will have a smaller apparent rotational speed than those towards the ecliptic. So longer exposure towards the Pole.

If you have a live view to check images increase the exposure until you see the effects of trailing, then settle for exposure of that limit or less.

I found this helpfull. http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/30263/what-is-the-rule-of-600-in-astrophotography

[laudropb]

Very nice first attempt. I think the fore ground house image is just a little too bright and does take your attention of the stars.

[Azelfafage]

Thanks to everyone for the replies. The advice is a lot to take in all at once but I'll manage eventually

As I implied, it was the first decent attempt after about 50 or so failures - I did have a go at the Plough and the Pleiades in the same session but the results were disappointing due to rushing things - as I said I was running short on time for the sake of domestic harmony .

So one big lesson - plan my sessions better and don't rush .

Dark skies are not easy to find round my way, so I need to investigate that further.

Best regards,

A

[Pompey Monkey]

Wooo! The whole of Auriga, most of Taurus, and the majority of Perseus in a one second exposure!

Well done that man!

[Azelfafage]

Wooo! The whole of Auriga, most of Taurus, and the majority of Perseus in a one second exposure!

Well done that man!

Perhaps even a hint of Milky Way with a longer exposure?

Never mind, there's always another night.

Thanks AM, BTW - I'll give your website a look over.

Seriously, I hope this will inspire other imaging beginners " to have a go" and not be deterred by initial failures  - all the knowledge of imaging to date that I have has been gleaned from this site, the BAA meeting I attended last month and the odd online "handout". I've not spent hours poring over books and agonising over small details, just got on with it and experimented.

Also I haven't (to date) spent mega-money (famous last words? ).

Regards,

A