I just love this photo! It's a touch grainy on here but the full res must be stunning.
Dan-gerMouse - 07/Aug/13
Stupendous, likey very much....
mr mills - 08/Aug/13
Thanks guys. The full res version is huge (this is a 10 photo stitch), but is much smoother. Note to self Bicubic smoother and not Bicubic sharper for reduction!
James Rushforth - 09/Aug/13
Yes, it really has to be dark to capture the Milky Way. Well done!
Sean Kelly - 09/Aug/13
Quite something...amazed it wasn't photo of the week!
Nicholas Livesey - 12/Aug/13
Beautiful scenery and great shot James. Very skilfully done.
Mike421 - 13/Aug/13
The mountain is actually the Gran Vernel, which is a subgroup of the Marmolada massif : )
Franz the Stampede - 15/Aug/13
I took some similar pictures this month and they didn't quite come out as nice. Could you share your camera settings?
JimboWizbo - 16/Aug/13
Congratulations! This photo was chosen as Photo of the Week, based on votes by registered users over the past 7 days.
UKC Photos - 18/Aug/13
Utterly unbelievable. An incredible picture.
Alex Parker - 18/Aug/13
Lovely image. A definite 5.
I'm baffled by how you did this. If it's a 10 photo stitch, how did you manage to register the images, assuming they're all time exposures, by which time the stars would have moved relative to the landscape?
AllanMac - 19/Aug/13
Many thanks for all the comments.
Franz - Thanks very much and thanks for the clarification.
Jimbo - The camera settings depend entirely on what camera you have, what lens you are using and where you are. Mine would in all likelihood be very different to yours even if you were stood beside me. But essentially you want your lens on the widest aperture it goes to (to get the most light in, in the smallest amount of time), you want the exposure to be between 30 seconds (only possible if you use a 10-22 on a crop frame or a 14mm on a full frame - otherwise the stars will trail) and 15 seconds. You then need an ISO of roughly between 500-1500 (the higher the ISO the brighter the stars but at the cost of the black areas looking grainy). There are further complications like photos looking 'soft' when the lens is wide open etc meaning you might need to stop it down ever so slightly but that's the gist!
I'll try and do an article at some point to explain the above (probably very badly) in more detail.
AllanMac - You are indeed correct, the stars would have shifted slightly in the time it took me to take the shots. However not enough at a focal length of 14mm with a relatively short exposure to be noticeable on such a large stitch. You can see the stars have trailed slightly on the full res version at a 100% crop.
James Rushforth - 19/Aug/13
Stunning. I love this. Wish I was there.
Flinticus - 19/Aug/13
This is amazing, I want to take my kids somewhere to see this.
A few questions, is it possible to see things like this with the naked eye?
Is it possible to see things like this in the UK (if we ever get a few minutes which aren't overcast)? Where do you have to go?
If it's clear can you see this any day of the year or do "the stars have to align"?
BenCr - 21/Aug/13
Login as Existing User to add your comments Search for comments
BenCr - You could see the milky way with the naked eye on this particular evening. It obviously isn't as strong as in the photo as the camera picks up more light than your eyes can over the length of the exposure.
You need somewhere really dark, and if possible with a new moon. I'm not often in the UK but I imagine the milky way can be seen well in North Wales and Scotland (you need to be well away from cities as they create a lot of light pollution). I'm sure some of the other UKC users could probably help.
However if you really want to do it properly get to Northern Norway, you might even see the northern lights at the same time!
If its dark and clear enough you can often see the milky way the 'stars don't have to align' as such. However the milky way does move across the sky during the night.
I hope that helps!
James Rushforth - 24/Aug/13