My Pics of the Aurora Borealis

[jkmccrann]

I was hoping to see these, it's a pity, but the links are no longer valid.

[ozzmosis]

ya same here ...

[Titana]

What happened to the pics????



Titana............

[R.A.F.]

What happened to the pics????

BBD probably took them down after this thread stopped receiving posts almost 10 months ago...

[Titana]

BBD probably took them down after this thread stopped receiving posts almost 10 months ago...

Uuuppps didnīt notice until you mentioned it.



Titana..........

[R.A.F.]

No worries...it's not your fault...

[Big Brother Dunk]

I was hoping to see these, it's a pity, but the links are no longer valid.

I've reposted the pics.

Thanks for the interest.

AB1.jpgAB2.jpgAB3.jpgAB4.jpgAB5.jpgAB6.jpgAB7.jpg

[publiusr]

I love them~!

[charmquark]

amazing pix! Thanks for sharing them again.

Did they ever get published?

[Titana]

!! Very nice!!






Titana..................

[H.Haeri]

Very Nice








SPIRIT_1368

[seeker372011]

yes great to see them resurrected

[Melusine]

What a sky! Thanks for reposting them--very enjoyable. Maybe you get some more this November.

[Kuiper_Object_42]

I like all of these, but B6 and B7 strike me as being particularly nice. Did you ever get them published?


Kuiper Object 42

Just another Ice Ball in the Sky...

[Big Brother Dunk]

I like all of these, but B6 and B7 strike me as being particularly nice. Did you ever get them published?


Kuiper Object 42

Just another Ice Ball in the Sky...

I agree, 6 & 7 are my favourites. #7 in particular, it looks like a bird taking flight.

And no, I never did follow through and get them published. I put the idea on the back burner, and it kind of stayed there right through the summer.

[Arneb]

Absolutely gorgeous!

[Zogski]

Excellent pictures! I tried to take pictures of northern lights / auroras with my digital Canon camera (5 megapixels), but I ended up with very grainy pictures, especially with the "ISO 400 emulation". I guess I'll have to try with a roll of film, old style.

[Big Brother Dunk]

Excellent pictures! I tried to take pictures of northern lights / auroras with my digital Canon camera (5 megapixels), but I ended up with very grainy pictures, especially with the "ISO 400 emulation". I guess I'll have to try with a roll of film, old style.

I don't know about any of the professional level digital SLR cameras, but the typical "consumer" camera isn't great when it comes to sky photos. As far as I know, film still rules for astrophotography.

[SolusLupus]

Purrrrrty...

*Drool*

[Eoanthropus Dawsoni]

You should consider putting a "© Your name here" on your images before posting them online. That will cut down on the chance that someone will steal them and claim them as their own.

[Eoanthropus Dawsoni]

I don't know about any of the professional level digital SLR cameras, but the typical "consumer" camera isn't great when it comes to sky photos. As far as I know, film still rules for astrophotography.

I switched from film to digital this spring and am extremely happy with the results. All of my recent aurora photos were shot with a Pentax istDS. I love the ability to change ISO between images, and of course I am no longer spending money on film and processing.

I shoot in high quality jpg format and that gives me a resolution which I believe to be equal to or better than 35mm film. I've had some of my aurora shots printed by a pro lab at 8x10 and found the results to be sharper than I used to get with ISO 400 film. I think they would probably print well even at 16x20 and plan to give that a try. For aurora photos I do have to do a digital noise removal, otherwise they will appear quite grainy. For print quality images I save the files at 600 dpi or greater (the stuff I post online is 72 dpi).

One downside of digital is battery life. The long exposure times drain the batteries very quickly. I can shoot an entire wedding on the battery power that I go through in 15 or 20 long exposures.

[Big Brother Dunk]

I switched from film to digital this spring and am extremely happy with the results. All of my recent aurora photos were shot with a Pentax istDS. I love the ability to change ISO between images, and of course I am no longer spending money on film and processing.

I shoot in high quality jpg format and that gives me a resolution which I believe to be equal to or better than 35mm film. I've had some of my aurora shots printed by a pro lab at 8x10 and found the results to be sharper than I used to get with ISO 400 film. I think they would probably print well even at 16x20 and plan to give that a try. For aurora photos I do have to do a digital noise removal, otherwise they will appear quite grainy. For print quality images I save the files at 600 dpi or greater (the stuff I post online is 72 dpi).

One downside of digital is battery life. The long exposure times drain the batteries very quickly. I can shoot an entire wedding on the battery power that I go through in 15 or 20 long exposures.

Thanks for the info E.D. Although I'd love to get one, the type of camera you have is a little pricey for me.

[Eoanthropus Dawsoni]

Thanks for the info E.D. Although I'd love to get one, the type of camera you have is a little pricey for me.

Yes, they are a bit spendy. I have been using Pentax equipment for 30 years and wanted to stick with that brand because many of my lenses are compatible with the new camera. But Cannon does have some fairly nice digital SLRs that once can find for under $500 USD. That is still a lot of money, but if you start figuring film and processing cost, the price of a new camera becomes more reasonable.

I did not see in the thread that you mentioned what you are now using for a camera. If it is one of the newer SLRs, there is a good chance that your existing lenses may be compatible with a digital. If you do someday decide to go digital, look for something in the 6 megapixel range. Anything less will probably not give you the results you want.

I recommend looking through the aurora galleries at spaceweather.com. Many of the photographers there do describe what equipment they use. I see a lot of nice work done with the lower cost Cannon digital SLRs.

[Eoanthropus Dawsoni]

Excellent pictures! I tried to take pictures of northern lights / auroras with my digital Canon camera (5 megapixels), but I ended up with very grainy pictures, especially with the "ISO 400 emulation". I guess I'll have to try with a roll of film, old style.

Get an image processing program (I use Paintshop Pro 9) and do the digital camera noise removal. It will make a big difference.

Even with my nice Pentax, the aurora images straight out of the camera look grainy. So I resize them to 600 dpi and remove the noise. The end result is amazing.