Milky way over the Maze

[Ben Egbert]

Milky way over the Maze I took this at the Maze overlook. It consists of 480 raws taken with my Canon R5 at ISO3200, 20 seconds, f2.4 and 14mm. I started at 1.30 and finished at 4:30.

I originally intended to include it in a larger video featuring our day and night at the Maze overlook, but decided to make it stand alone.

Many of you have seen a still taken from one of the last frames. That one was processed differently as it was possible to do more with a single image. This one was mass processed in ACR then converted to a video.

This is my first milky way time lapse. As you can see, I had a cloud issue, which I simply embraced. I could have cut the first half or more, but this was a learning experience and I am posting it primarily for critique.

CC welcome.

 

[Douglas Sherman]

I love the music. Without the clouds it would have been perfect, Ben. The clouds make the stars look like fireflies which is distracting.

 

[Ben Egbert]

I love the music. Without the clouds it would have been perfect, Ben. The clouds make the stars look like fireflies which is distracting.

Thanks for your comment Douglas, I see what you mean about those pesky clouds. Glad you like the music.

 

[AlanLichty]

Nice setting but the clouds definitely took a toll on what could have been. I was always amazed at how much light there was out in that part of Canyonlands on a moonless night.

 

[Ben Egbert]

I think that light is Monticello and Blanding.

 

[JimFox]

Hey Ben, the clouds are awesome! I don't know why you thought they were bad. The clouds add a super cool element with the Milky Way peeking out until finally a full reveal towards the end. Embrace clouds at night, they add such a cool aspect to the night. Without the clouds, if it's just totally clear, your Milky Way ends up looking like a million others. The clouds make it unique.

Now some questions and statements.

1. It's too dark... At least a stop too dark. Is your monitor too bright? Because your Night sky shots really need to be brighter. That's the biggest thing that hurts this, because the stars get lost in the darkness. Don't be afraid to make your night skies brighter.

2. I sure wish it had gone on longer. Why does it stop there? The Milky Way had finally come out and shortly after the video ends.

3. The White Balance is off, the sky has a very magenta cast to it.

My advice? Go back and pull the raws back into ACR and brighten this up a good stop, maybe a little more. Use the White Slider and the Highlights Slider to keep the Milky Way from blowing out while you increase the exposure. Go to one of the frames with the Milky Way in it, and edit that one and then sync all of the rest of the images to that one. That way you can keep an eye on the MW.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Thanks for the details advice Jim. I will give this a go. I have been purposely shooting for black skys. What settings would you have recommended? I think they are pretty close to yours except I used 20 second as apposed to 25. 25 would have made for a shorter video.

That peak of the MW never returned.

 

[JimFox]

Shoot for a proper exposure, don't shoot based on how long the timelapse will be. Let the timelape be what ever it will be. I have never ever thought about that in all of the timelapses I have done so far. I just let them turn out to whatever they turn out to, my focus when I am shooting is on a properly exposed image.

Your shooting for black skies is totally wrong. Shoot based on your histogram as I have stated in the past. Your Histogram should be around 1/3rd to just less then half on the left. You can always darken the sky to taste in post, but if you underexpose as you keep doing, you will just add noise. You are losing so many background stars in your images because you keep shooting them too dark.

So I am not going to recommend settings, I am going to recommend you use your Histogram at night, just like you would use it during the day. That is your key to success.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Ok, I opened the raws and adjusted plus one stop and some other items, leaving the WB alone. I converted them to JPG but before I do a render, I wanted to have you check this out. I think its too yellow. I still have them loaded in ACR so I could change and resave.

 

[AlanLichty]

Grab the temp slider and head over into the blues. The exposure works here.

 

[JimFox]

Yep, as Alan said, cool down that WB, you don’t want a brown sky.

And what’s cool now, is you can actually see the ground.

Let’s see after the WB change, you might want to bring the White Slider into the positive about 30 or so to help the stars be brighter.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Ok, I am converting 480 raws at the moment., probably be tomorrow before I have a video at Youtube.

 

[JimFox]

Sounds good, it does sure take a while.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Here is a frame taken from my newest version and worked as only a single can be worked.

 

[AlanLichty]

I like the rework.

 

[Jameel Hyder]

Nice job with the rework. At this resolution the noise looks fine as well.

 

[JimFox]

That looks pretty good Ben.

What I find weird though is the stars seem to be blue, but the background sky still has a brown look to it. The WB is definitely so much better in this rework, but I don't get why the stars would be blue and the sky isn't.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Got me Jim.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Ok, the new milky way time lapse has loaded at 4K in Youtube. Here it is.

Let me have it, I want good constructive feedback.

 

[AlanLichty]

I like the new version a lot more - the increased visibility does a lot to keep me focused on the scene. Being able to see the clouds and not just their silhouettes makes viewing much easier. There is one brief flash of foreground light right at the end that was a bit of a jolt to see.