Posts: 3
Threads: 1
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 3
Threads: 1
Joined: Dec 2013
I'm planning a wide angle (maybe 24mm) landscape time lapse during the solar eclipse on Aug. 21, 2017 in North America (facing the sun). In this really good example -- https://vimeo.com/122795016
--Witek Kaskin seems to keep his exposure settings constant, letting everything except a small ring go black during totality. I think this is very effective with his cool landscape and I may end up using constant exposure for mine, but part of his success is due to the reflection on the water, which I won't have. Also, I have an other-worldly type of landscape in mind and it would be cool to retain more landscape definition and to see stars (even if only very briefly) during totality. The problem is that totality only lasts two minutes so there's not much time for ramping or for long exposures. I think that 4 second intervals are the longest I could afford so that totality is more than just a blink in time; 1.6 seconds at 24 frames per second, specifically. (My current plan is to shoot from one hour before to one hour after the eclipse and then, possibly, to speed up the non-eclipse parts in Premiere Pro.)
I'm wondering if others are thinking about this or have thoughts about whether and how to change shutter speeds. I'd be interested in any discussion people might have about making a timelapse of a solar eclipse, but I'm particularly interested in wide-angle shooting and these questions:
1) What do you think about the tradeoff between getting sufficient frames during totality and having a long enough exposure time to capture stars? Is a 3 second exposure long enough to get worthwhile stars (with small aperature and high ISO)?
2) Do you have any thoughts about auto holy grail in qdslrdashboard for this purpose? I suspect that maybe the shutter speeds and ISO have to be changed manually because the darkness will come and go so quickly, and the histogram will be too heavily influenced by the sun, which will have to blow out anyway.
Now that I've written these questions, I realize that there's some experimentation I should do. I still think there might be others who are thinking about this and that a discussion might be beneficial to many.
Thanks,
Dan
--Witek Kaskin seems to keep his exposure settings constant, letting everything except a small ring go black during totality. I think this is very effective with his cool landscape and I may end up using constant exposure for mine, but part of his success is due to the reflection on the water, which I won't have. Also, I have an other-worldly type of landscape in mind and it would be cool to retain more landscape definition and to see stars (even if only very briefly) during totality. The problem is that totality only lasts two minutes so there's not much time for ramping or for long exposures. I think that 4 second intervals are the longest I could afford so that totality is more than just a blink in time; 1.6 seconds at 24 frames per second, specifically. (My current plan is to shoot from one hour before to one hour after the eclipse and then, possibly, to speed up the non-eclipse parts in Premiere Pro.)
I'm wondering if others are thinking about this or have thoughts about whether and how to change shutter speeds. I'd be interested in any discussion people might have about making a timelapse of a solar eclipse, but I'm particularly interested in wide-angle shooting and these questions:
1) What do you think about the tradeoff between getting sufficient frames during totality and having a long enough exposure time to capture stars? Is a 3 second exposure long enough to get worthwhile stars (with small aperature and high ISO)?
2) Do you have any thoughts about auto holy grail in qdslrdashboard for this purpose? I suspect that maybe the shutter speeds and ISO have to be changed manually because the darkness will come and go so quickly, and the histogram will be too heavily influenced by the sun, which will have to blow out anyway.
Now that I've written these questions, I realize that there's some experimentation I should do. I still think there might be others who are thinking about this and that a discussion might be beneficial to many.
Thanks,
Dan