# Selfie under the milky way



## DScience (Aug 9, 2016)

peace


----------



## Granddad (Aug 9, 2016)

I LIKE that. I assume you were wearing a head light... Looks like you're being struck by a brainwave from space ... or touched by the gods.


----------



## DScience (Aug 9, 2016)

Thank you! hahaha yea it's a headlamp, but I like your interpretation.


----------



## mnmcote (Aug 9, 2016)

That's freakin' awesome!!!


----------



## fishing4sanity (Aug 10, 2016)

Amazing photo! Is that from one shot or multiple shots? Either way it's very good.


----------



## FITBMX (Aug 10, 2016)

If that is 30 sec exposure, you did hold really still!
Great work!


----------



## DScience (Aug 10, 2016)

Thanks guys, yes it's a 30 second exposure, single, and it was a challenge to hold still. I have a few new ones too!


----------



## ZombiesniperJr (Aug 10, 2016)

Nice shot


----------



## Dean_Gretsch (Aug 10, 2016)

Great photo. Can't wait for the others.


----------



## KmH (Aug 11, 2016)

It's a popular concept.
But in this case I don't think it came out nearly as good as it could have.

The stars are elongated, likely because the exposure of 30 seconds was to long for the focal length of the lens used.
Consequently, the stars are not sharp and the shot looks a bit out of focus.
Some of the nebular objects in the sky are over exposed, and IMO the color balance is off a fair amount.


----------



## DScience (Aug 11, 2016)

KmH said:


> It's a popular concept.
> But in this case I don't think it came out nearly as good as it could have.
> 
> The stars are elongated, likely because the exposure of 30 seconds was to long for the focal length of the lens used.
> ...



hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah


----------



## SquarePeg (Aug 11, 2016)

Technical perfection is not everything.  This is a fabulous shot.  Leaving the headlamp on was a great idea.  Can't believe you can hold that still for 30 seconds.  I wouldn't even make 3.


----------



## KmH (Aug 11, 2016)

Yep. Technical perfection isn't everything.
However, note that the photograph is posted in a C&C forum section.


----------



## DScience (Aug 11, 2016)

First off, I didn't explicitly ask for C&C, however with that said I don't mind constructive criticism. I laughed because it's really easy to talk about technicalities when you're sitting behind a desk in Iowa. This photo was taken at 10,000 feet in the high Sierras, on top of a mountain, pitch black skies...have you ever tried to capture the milky way in such conditions?? 

This was my second time trying a shot like this, and I tried it using various parameters, but ultimately I sacrificed certain aspects for others. For instance, yea there are slight star trails, but ONLY IF YOU VIEW IT ZOOMED IN, but I chose 30 second exposure because the enhanced milky way colors/detail was what I wanted with the photo, as opposed to going for the most round stars I could capture. Second, this photo is heavily edited in Photoshop, and I was in no way trying to create a 'realistic' photo of the milky way. When you are standing out there on a mountain you can only see a faint whisp of the milky way, thus anything you capture with long exposure is so different from the naked eye, and I personally with these shots go for a more artistic approach. Lastly, sure, some of the stars are blown out, whatever.


----------



## jake337 (Aug 11, 2016)

DScience said:


> First off, I didn't explicitly ask for C&C, however with that said I don't mind constructive criticism. I laughed because it's really easy to talk about technicalities when you're sitting behind a desk in Iowa. This photo was taken at 10,000 feet in the high Sierras, on top of a mountain, pitch black skies...have you ever tried to capture the milky way in such conditions??
> 
> This was my second time trying a shot like this, and I tried it using various parameters, but ultimately I sacrificed certain aspects for others. For instance, yea there are slight star trails, but ONLY IF YOU VIEW IT ZOOMED IN, but I chose 30 second exposure because the enhanced milky way colors/detail was what I wanted with the photo, as opposed to going for the most round stars I could capture. Second, this photo is heavily edited in Photoshop, and I was in no way trying to create a 'realistic' photo of the milky way. When you are standing out there on a mountain you can only see a faint whisp of the milky way, thus anything you capture with long exposure is so different from the naked eye, and I personally with these shots go for a more artistic approach. Lastly, sure, some of the stars are blown out, whatever.



Way to handle a perfectly fine critique.  I like your image but his critique makes sense if you plan to print and for future imaging.

Check out Astrobear on Facebook.  He often shows his SOOC milky way work.  

https://m.facebook.com/astrophotobe...481435818560085/1032208720149456/?type=3&fs=5


----------



## DScience (Aug 11, 2016)

I wasn't looking for critique.


----------



## jake337 (Aug 11, 2016)

DScience said:


> I wasn't looking for critique.



See how easy that was. 

  Instead you gave a whole bunch of excuses.


----------



## DScience (Aug 11, 2016)

Yo Jake, thanks for that link, that guy has some good advice for editing!


----------



## KmH (Aug 12, 2016)

DScience said:


> I wasn't looking for critique.


That's what the Just For Fun forum is for.


----------



## KmH (Aug 12, 2016)

DScience said:


> . . . This photo was taken at 10,000 feet in the high Sierras, on top of a mountain, pitch black skies...have you ever tried to capture the milky way in such conditions?? . . .


Yes I have, and in the Sierras.
I have been doing astronomy and astrophotography, off and on, for 45 years.
I often did astrophotography at/near _Golden Trout Camp_ just south of the New Army Pass, Mt. Langley, Cirque Peak, Cottonwood Lakes area.
Take Whitney Portal road out of Lone Pine and 3 miles down the road hang a left on Horseshoe Meadows road to the trail head and hike in.

I moved to Iowa about 10 years ago.
I lived in Coronado, CA from 1971 to 1982.
I moved to Tucson from there.
While I was in Tucson I was active in the local amateur astronomy community and volunteered at the Flandrau Planetarium on the campus of the U of A.

By the way, when the center of the Milky Way galaxy is up that high in the sky it can't be 'pitch black'. In fact if you looked closely you would have noticed that that part of the sky is bright enough that you, trees, and such cast a faint shadow.


----------



## andrrsgg (Aug 12, 2016)

What camera/lens were you using?
Really nice photo btw


----------



## DScience (Aug 13, 2016)

KmH said:


> DScience said:
> 
> 
> > . . . This photo was taken at 10,000 feet in the high Sierras, on top of a mountain, pitch black skies...have you ever tried to capture the milky way in such conditions?? . . .
> ...



Would you mind sharing some of your great milky way shots??


----------



## fmw (Aug 14, 2016)

Creative and interesting. That's the basis of good photography.  Good job.


----------



## BananaRepublic (Aug 14, 2016)

DScience said:


> So my new calling is selfie milky way pics. I have several coming up, so stay tuned! This next one is shot in Desolation Wilderness, on top of Mt Price. It was hard to stand still for 30 seconds, but i'm getting better.
> 
> Follow me on Instagram:
> Daniel Sanculi™ (@thelightninja) • Instagram photos and videos
> ...



Nice I wouldn't be to keen about going to the cliff edge at night, myself.


----------



## KmH (Aug 15, 2016)

DScience said:


> Would you mind sharing some of your great milky way shots??


I made those images some 40 years ago. They are B&W negatives in cold storage in AZ.
I have no plans on having my film negatives digitized.
So you're out of luck.


----------



## thereyougo! (Aug 15, 2016)

DScience said:


> First off, I didn't explicitly ask for C&C, however with that said I don't mind constructive criticism. I laughed because it's really easy to talk about technicalities when you're sitting behind a desk in Iowa. This photo was taken at 10,000 feet in the high Sierras, on top of a mountain, pitch black skies...have you ever tried to capture the milky way in such conditions??
> 
> This was my second time trying a shot like this, and I tried it using various parameters, but ultimately I sacrificed certain aspects for others. For instance, yea there are slight star trails, but ONLY IF YOU VIEW IT ZOOMED IN, but I chose 30 second exposure because the enhanced milky way colors/detail was what I wanted with the photo, as opposed to going for the most round stars I could capture. Second, this photo is heavily edited in Photoshop, and I was in no way trying to create a 'realistic' photo of the milky way. When you are standing out there on a mountain you can only see a faint whisp of the milky way, thus anything you capture with long exposure is so different from the naked eye, and I personally with these shots go for a more artistic approach. Lastly, sure, some of the stars are blown out, whatever.



It's a good shot and I like it.  However why the hostility and attitude? See the note at the top of the session:

"A gallery for sharing photos of the people in your life, from informal portraits & candids, to your home studio shots or street photography. Post for discussion and feedback, including general critique."


----------



## DScience (Aug 15, 2016)

thereyougo! said:


> DScience said:
> 
> 
> > First off, I didn't explicitly ask for C&C, however with that said I don't mind constructive criticism. I laughed because it's really easy to talk about technicalities when you're sitting behind a desk in Iowa. This photo was taken at 10,000 feet in the high Sierras, on top of a mountain, pitch black skies...have you ever tried to capture the milky way in such conditions??
> ...



I'm glad you like it bro!


----------

