Aurora help needed

snaphappy

Senior Member
So I moved out of "P" and have been trying to figure "M". My biggest frustration is that I look at my screen after a shot and it looks great. I can see foreground and everything looks good so I make small adjustments thinking I've got it right but then come in and look on my computer and my photos are SOOOO dark :confused: It wasn't that dark out and my light meter was telling me I was waaay over exposed. I turned off Noise reduction but am wondering if I should turn it on for Aurora shots? For stars its easy they don't move! I know my foreground isn't great but I was just sitting in the backyard but I'm just practicing still. I hope to get some nicer foreground etc this summer but if I ended up with these results anywhere but in my yard I'd be VERY disappointed.
I'm really hoping for some critical help with my settings for a brighter clearer image
Oh there was a wild heavy fog along the ground that thinned but reached up into the sky which I really wanted to capture as well :(
I have upped my exposure, sharpness, definition and used noise reduction on each of these
All with 18-55mm kit lens at 18mm

NIK_0962.jpg
iso 800 18mm f3.5 5secs

NIK_0965.jpg
iso800 18mm f3.5 2.5secs

NIK_0975.jpg
Iso800 18mm f3.5 5secs

NIK_0982.jpg
iso 800 f3.5 2secs

NIK_0984.jpg
iso800 f3.5 2secs

NIK_0985.jpg
Iso 800 f3.5 2secs

NIK_0987.jpg
iso800 f3.5 2secs

NIK_0989.jpg
iso 800 f3.5 2secs

NIK_0993.jpg
iso800 f3.5 2secs

NIK_0996.jpg
iso800 f3.5 2secs

NIK_1014.jpg
iso 800 f3.5 3secs

NIK_1016.jpg
iso 100 f3.5 2.5secs

NIK_1023.jpg
iso 100 f3.5 2.5secs
NIK_1042.jpg
iso 1000 f3.5 3secs

NIK_1048.jpg
Iso 800 f3.5 5secs (did a longer because dancing slowed)

NIK_1070.jpg
iso 1000 f4 3secs

So how would you have set your settings to capture this?
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
Your shots don't look bad to me... What is it you're not happy with specifically? Exposure, or... What?

Also, are you shooting in RAW or JPG? I ask because that may account for the difference between what you're seeing on your camera's LCD and what you're seeing on your computer. If it were me, I'd be shooting in RAW because you'll have far more latitude in correcting for exposure and removing noise. For shots that are only 3-5 seconds using ISO 800 I would not bother with either variety of in camera NR.
 

nikonpup

Senior Member
some of the things i see on the internet. Lower display screen brillance. Tripod and cable release. Shot raw. One thing i am not clear on is exposure time, many talk about 20-30 sec.
You are lucky that you have the chance to shot these events. How did you know there was going to be an event?
 

snaphappy

Senior Member
Oh these are all RAW which I understand makes it a bit darker. My problem is they look VERY noisy to me. I want one I can hang on my wall but these are seriously dark and noisy on my computer screen so I think I need a lower ISO but when I use a slower shutter I lose the definition in the lights because they're moving not stationary.
 

nikonpup

Senior Member
did you do any post processing of the raw images? Tried to down load an image but i need permission, not sure how that works.
 

snaphappy

Senior Member
Ron I want to see the definition in the moving lights (which I find most fascinating) not smooth them out. I did more lights a few nights (mornings :) ) ago and tried longer exposures but I wasn't happy with them at all.

I was using tripod but this is half the sky so you can see by my foreground I was moving and adjusting ALOT where it looked like the lights were warming up for a biggest show. There are areas of greater brilliance and movement so as camera was working I was watching for the next shot.

Oh and I knew there was activity because I looked out my window. Then went running for my camera, tripod and went running to the yard in my slippers :)
 

snaphappy

Senior Member
Ron I think I found and unclicked the right thing so you can download my images here. Yes I just have iphoto so upped exposure, definition, sharpness and used noise reduction on all these
 

nikonpup

Senior Member
one of the suggestion i saw was, put the camera in "night scene" look at the settings, go to manual and put those settings in.
 

Kodiak

Senior Member
Hi snaphappy,

Basically, you're tackling a subject that could turn out to be the craziest nightmare
you will ever have!

Low lights, ever moving and changing subjects, let alone the transparencies that lets you
see the stars…

The strategies are many but the one that had worked best for me was:

The faster you shoot, the less the stars will be visible.

The slower you shoot the blurrier the Aurora

Aperture never less or more than the sweet point: ƒ8 to ƒ11.

Keep iso as low as possible knowing that the aperture is almost fixed and shutter speed
MUST be prioritized.

AF off. Focus on infinity minus a tad.

Work tethered!

Manual mode

With my cameras I don't use NR


Have a good time!
 
Last edited:

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I found this article hat appears to be almost over the top in its detailed instructions on how to do what you want. Seems like there is a certain amount of superfluous material so you could probably skip halfway down the page to get to the specifics of exposure but you may love (or hate) the whole damn article.

Either way, here it is... Go nuts.

How to Photograph the Northern Lights With a Digital Camera




....
 
Last edited:

snaphappy

Senior Member
I did try higher apertures trying to get that heavy fog to show up in my tree line as well but without luck.
here's one I haven't PP at all (note this was not black on my camera LCD! or I would have deleted it at the time)
Oh stars are ok but what I'm most interested in is making the aurora look great, the stars to me here are just the props that make the composition better for my subject which is the colourful dancing Aurora
NIK_1073.jpg


I guess if I want to use the faster shutter speed I'm going to need to wait for a full moon, a cloudless night and a great show like last night oh and that a tokina 11-16mm 2.8 drops suddenly drops from the heavens into my lap LOL
 
Last edited:

snaphappy

Senior Member
Thanx Horoscope fish I hadn't found that link and it was very helpful so added it to my other bookmarked aurora links. Now that I think of it and read through that link the best summer aurora images are over water which would help with reflective light but yes the winter ones I took were much better with the wonderful (but cold!) reflective white snow. Thanx it gave me some more to think about as I try for a better shot. I do use the NOAA site its on my iphone ready to check all the time. I did the calculations and I need a 4 over my area in order to see lights. Summer is far more comfortable to be out shooting since I can freely move my tripod but it happens much later (lately 1-4am) without the reflective snow it's going to be much harder to get foreground showing up.

​Thanx guys I'll keep trying
 

snaphappy

Senior Member
So here's some that I took last weekend these are a bit earlier in am (2:30-3am) so sky was a bit brighter but lights smaller so I tried longer exposures to see what results I would get. It looks more smoothed out and so last night (1am this morning) I tried shorter exposures to see if I could capture the upward streaks and dancing better

NIK_0748.jpg
ISO 200 f3.8 5secs

NIK_0755.jpg
iso 200 f3.8 8secs

NIK_0774.jpg
iso 200 f5.6 20secs

NIK_0781.jpg
iso f8 20secs
 

Attachments

  • NIK_0752.jpg
    NIK_0752.jpg
    205.2 KB · Views: 61

Scott Murray

Senior Member
I would suggest faster glass if you wanted lower ISO, atleast f2.8 or faster.

Copied from an earlier post...

THE IMPORTANCE OF ISO: When photographing the aurora, high ISO capability is critical. For a good read on the importance of this over megapixels check out this article at Gizmodo: Why ISO is the New Megapixels.The upper end of today’s digital cameras have excellent in-camera noise reduction. If you are shooting .JPG files you will want both Long Exposure and High ISO Noise Reduction turned on. If you are shooting RAW, you only need Long Exposure Noise Reduction turned on. And there is some debate on the need for Long Exposure Noise Reduction due to the cold temperatures in which aurora photography takes place and noise is a function of heat on the sensor to some degree-test your camera first.

[h=3]LENSES[/h]There are several desirable qualities to look for when considering lenses for aurora photography, As a general rule of thumb, you can pick any of the three:

  • Wide angle
  • Fast (large aperture of F/2.8 or wider)
  • Sharp
  • Minimal vignetting
  • Inexpensive
I have yet to discover the perfect lens, but here are a two of my favorites, I discuss this more thoroughly in my eBook:

  • Canon 16-35mm F/2.8 USM favorite!
    F/2.8
    : Outstanding optical performer, but not exceptionally fast. A bit expensive but versatile for both aurora and excellent for daytime general landscapes.
  • Nikon Zoom Super Wide Angle AF 14-24mm f/2.8G ED, AF lens (I use this lens with a Canon converter mount - favorite!)
 
Last edited:
Top