Great northern lights shot. When I lived in Alaska, I always had a hard time with star trails. How did you manage to get this type of exposure without star trails and have a bridge in the foreground?I'd like to know that too, because to get the bridge that 'bright', I'd expect a long exposure, which would mean movement both in the stars in the sky and in the aurora itself. My first thought was that it looks 'fake', but I'd be happy to be corrected!
Thanks,
Mark
Great northern lights shot. When I lived in Alaska, I always had a hard time with star trails. How did you manage to get this type of exposure without star trails and have a bridge in the foreground?
Thanks,
Mark
Northern Lights at the Jökulsá á Fjöllum river in north Iceland.Bridge to the Heavens (http://www.parrikar.com/blog/2012/01/23/bridge-to-the-heavens/)(http://www.parrikar.org/images/LL/northern-lights-jokulsa.jpg)
Thank you, all.Thanks for 'illuminating' me! It is a fine image.
Mark,
I used the Canon 14mm f/2.8 wide open at ISO 1600. If you can keep the exposure time to less than 20-25 seconds, you won't generate visible star trails. An even better lens for this would be the recently released Zeiss 25mm f/2 for the Canon and Nikon mounts, a full stop faster. Furthermore, the infinity focus with a Zeiss can almost be guaranteed by turning the focus ring all the way out. Not so with the Canon lens. In the pitch dark conditions this is critical.
The bridge was illuminated by the lights of our super jeep. Nothing fake about the shot.
Hi Rajan
Lovely image. I hope you don't get offended but I think your frame template hugely detracts from the images you post both here and on your website where I just browsed. I think it cheapens the look of what are some fantastic images. It looks very templatey (just made up that word but you know what I mean)
I could be talking through my backside of course :)