# Milky Way over Maui, Hawaii



## Silverpenguin (Oct 10, 2010)

EDIT: Second shot now added with less waves and better sky exposure.

Hey all, been a while since I've done much with my camera. So nice to be getting back in to it again.

Taken on my week on the Hawaiian island of Maui last week. I spent the whole week trying to get a decent shot of this but cloud cover kept me at bay right up until the final night, when I managed to get the kind of shot I was after, which was one including some foreground interest. In this instance it was the shoreline with the waves crashing on the rocks, which I painted over with a torch during the exposure.

I also did a write up on my blog about my efforts to photograph the Milky Way, along with more images, including one taken in total darkness with the D3s, hand held for 2 seconds at ISO 102,400 - crazy stuff. *Check it out here*.





Second shot added:




D3, 14-24, F2.8, ISO 6400, 30 seconds


----------



## dinodan (Oct 10, 2010)

Very good! What camera, lens, exposure, etc.?


----------



## Silverpenguin (Oct 10, 2010)

dinodan said:


> Very good!  What camera, lens, esposure, etc.?


Thank you 

Camera, lens etc that are listed under the photo  :mrgreen:


----------



## Robin Usagani (Oct 10, 2010)

I dont understand how you still get details on the water and not all silky for 30 second shutter? Was it pitch black and you used flash?


EDIT: NM.. I reread your post.


----------



## dinodan (Oct 10, 2010)

Silverpenguin said:


> dinodan said:
> 
> 
> > Very good! What camera, lens, esposure, etc.?
> ...


 
Oh, yeah.  Thanks.  :blushing:


----------



## DerekMellott (Oct 10, 2010)

I love it!

 I need a wide fast lens!


----------



## jackiejay (Oct 10, 2010)

beutiful


----------



## aleksey123 (Oct 11, 2010)

very nice photo


----------



## akeigher (Oct 11, 2010)

Simply amazing.


----------



## RoRoCo (Oct 11, 2010)

Too noise in the sky...  I would reduce the ISO

~Sad Suburbanite...


----------



## AverageJoe (Oct 11, 2010)

Okay I've read everything and I'm still confused as to how you got a shot like this at f2.8? It is a very striking image though, thanks for posting.


----------



## Silverpenguin (Oct 12, 2010)

RoRoCo said:


> Too noise in the sky... I would reduce the ISO
> 
> ~Sad Suburbanite...


 :lmao:



AverageJoe said:


> Okay I've read everything and I'm still confused as to how you got a shot like this at f2.8? It is a very striking image though, thanks for posting.


Camera is set to f2.8, manually focused to infinity
ISO is set to 6400 to let in as much light as possible during the 30 second exposure (any longer than 30 seconds at 14mm and the starts begin to blur from movement)

I've added a second shot to the first post as I found another that had less waves and a better exposure in the sky.


----------



## Overread (Oct 12, 2010)

Been too long since we last saw you stuff - great to see and really a fantastic sight to behold! I also really like how you've brought in the sea and waves into the shot to kind of "ground" the shot and bring into the picture what was there at the time to see. 


And now to put Hawaii on my list of places to visit


----------



## michaelleggero (Oct 12, 2010)

everyone loves outspace stuff, i had no idea you could see that much detail from hawaii, wow... i don't think the waves help the picture any though, it's such a small part at the bottom that it just gets lost.  if you didn't mention the waves in the description i wouldn't have even noticed them, i was too distracted by the stars

Mike Leggero

http://www.michaelleggero.com


----------



## Silverpenguin (Oct 12, 2010)

Thanks for the replies all, appreciated.

Regarding the comments about the foreground, there are a couple of no foreground shots on my blog link. I like these as well but find them a little boring. The foreground for me adds an element of interest and helps ground the sky and give it context. All personal opinions though. Either way it was an amazing sight


----------



## DerekMellott (Oct 12, 2010)

Silverpenguin said:


> Thanks for the replies all, appreciated.
> 
> Regarding the comments about the foreground, there are a couple of no foreground shots on my blog link. I like these as well but find them a little boring. The foreground for me adds an element of interest and helps ground the sky and give it context. All personal opinions though. Either way it was an amazing sight



IMO you are very right, star pictures without any earthly elements are dull, I would argue that the foreground is the subject and the stars are amazing negative space.


----------

