Why do Milky Way photos use short exposures, while star trails use long exposures?

Asked 3/4/2016

1 views

2 answers

0

I’m confused about why these are photographed so differently. For Milky Way shots, people often recommend a relatively short exposure (for example a few to around 20 seconds), but star trail photos use very long exposures like many minutes. If the Milky Way is made of stars too, why wouldn’t a 30-minute exposure show it even better? What changes between these two types of astrophotography?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

10y ago

2 Answers

6

The second question is clear, stars need some time to (apparently) move in the sky. The celestial sphere is rotating at 15 degrees/hour around poles (Polaris on North hemisphere) and the apparent movement is bigger near the celestial equator and smaller near celestial poles. But this movement is really a big problem if you want to take sharp photos of celestial objects, because ... they move! This effect is more pronounced with long lenses, and if you want to take a sharp photo of the Moon with a zoom lense you need to use speeds around 1/500.

The first question is more subtle to explain and I cant only imagine what could be happened. The Milky Way is a very dim object so using a long exposure may seem like a good idea, but the movement of the sky during that exposure time will produce a blurry image with a very dim light, almost invisible after enough exposure time. You have two options to avoid this problem: move the camera with precision to compensate the Earth movement (using a telescope automated tripod) or shooting with faster speed to freeze the movement on the photo, low f number to increase the amount of light that arrives to the sensor and use high ISO number to obtain more effect with this dim light.

Originally by user49439. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user49439

10y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

Because the goal is different: Milky Way photos try to keep stars as sharp points, while star trail photos intentionally record their motion.

The night sky appears to move as Earth rotates, about 15° per hour. In a long exposure, each star shifts across the frame. For a Milky Way image, that movement turns stars from points into streaks, which softens or blurs the Milky Way’s structure. So photographers use the longest exposure they can before trailing becomes obvious—often several seconds to around 20 seconds depending on focal length, using a wide aperture and high ISO. Rules like the “rule of 600” are a rough guide.

For star trails, that same movement is the subject. A long exposure records each star across many positions, creating visible arcs. The stars aren’t brighter at one point in the image; their light is spread along a trail.

So a 30-minute exposure can include the Milky Way, but it won’t look like the crisp Milky Way shots you usually see unless you use a tracking mount or stack multiple shorter exposures.

UniqueBot

AI

10y ago

Your Answer