Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Photography
Low Light & Night
ISO setting for star trails
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="blackstar" data-source="post: 734630" data-attributes="member: 47518"><p>Did the experiment with the result (some diagnose after the images):</p><p></p><p>1. original jpg downloaded from the camera</p><p>[ATTACH]338721[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>2. jpg version of RAW exported from Darktable (unprocessed)</p><p>[ATTACH]338722[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>3. processed in DT</p><p>[ATTACH]338723[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>It looks like the original jpg does not fair the one from the RAW file through DT. In any way, it's obvious that the shot is over-exposed for 30', even though iso set as 100. The processed image was done with 2 instances of exp reduction (total about -4.0EV) and others. Couldn't figure out how exactly the exp EV is related to the exp time? Say if exp time cut half to 15', will I get the exp similar to the processed one? And then the star trails length also cut to half? Will anyone say that those farther away star trails look faint compare to the closer ones? Is that because of imaging failure or unclear sky?</p><p></p><p>I may learn a tip on how to bring out more of those fainting star trails in DT: First, exposure, shadow & highlight, contrast-brightness-saturation, color reconstruction, and highlight reconstruction all work to improve the problem "a little more or less" but still unsatisfactory to my like. Only the Tone Mapping module surprisingly gave me some very noticeable change and improvement I felt as best as I could get...</p><p></p><p> Now it's the point I would like to add my request for your diagnoses and treatments on my experiment. Thanks</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="blackstar, post: 734630, member: 47518"] Did the experiment with the result (some diagnose after the images): 1. original jpg downloaded from the camera [ATTACH=CONFIG]338721[/ATTACH] 2. jpg version of RAW exported from Darktable (unprocessed) [ATTACH=CONFIG]338722[/ATTACH] 3. processed in DT [ATTACH=CONFIG]338723[/ATTACH] It looks like the original jpg does not fair the one from the RAW file through DT. In any way, it's obvious that the shot is over-exposed for 30', even though iso set as 100. The processed image was done with 2 instances of exp reduction (total about -4.0EV) and others. Couldn't figure out how exactly the exp EV is related to the exp time? Say if exp time cut half to 15', will I get the exp similar to the processed one? And then the star trails length also cut to half? Will anyone say that those farther away star trails look faint compare to the closer ones? Is that because of imaging failure or unclear sky? I may learn a tip on how to bring out more of those fainting star trails in DT: First, exposure, shadow & highlight, contrast-brightness-saturation, color reconstruction, and highlight reconstruction all work to improve the problem "a little more or less" but still unsatisfactory to my like. Only the Tone Mapping module surprisingly gave me some very noticeable change and improvement I felt as best as I could get... Now it's the point I would like to add my request for your diagnoses and treatments on my experiment. Thanks [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Photography
Low Light & Night
ISO setting for star trails
Top