Hey, everyone, thanks for checking out my video. I first want to mention that Sonata Music reached out to me about sponsoring this video, and it was the perfect fit. I've been looking for a low-cost high-quality music licensing service for awhile now, and Sonata is the perfect solution. They make things easy with their great user-interface, affordable pricing, and the tracks themselves are high-quality and literally fit any mood I'm going for in a video. Check out Sonata music here: sonata.media/?.. Regarding the video, this was my longest project yet with over 2100 layers, realtime footage captured in the field, and hundreds of hours writing scripts, making illustrations, and animating. Astrophotography is my favorite photography genre and I hope this video helps you guys out. Feel free to leave your feedback in the comments section and stay tuned for more Apalapse content coming soon! Thanks!
Amazing video as always! Would love to see a separate tutorial video on the whole editing process (especially on photo stacking) and maybe on the different softwares you used
Really appreciate the work. Thanks a lot. Tonight I'll try to take photos of the Perseid meteor shower that will be visible in my city (I'll go to some darker areas). Photographing Milky Way is another thing to try tonight. Thanks for the video!
Thanks for the support! I was out last night too but didn't see any Perseids :(. Definitely try some core shots too while you're at it! The core won't be around for much longer so shoot it while you can!
@@Apalapse Unfortunately I didn't saw any too :( I set a timelapse with my Osmo Pocket while capturing long-exposure photos with the Nikon D3200. The stars are round as intended thanks to this guide, but there were no meteors. The Osmo Pocket captured moving things (about 7 of them) but I think all of them are aircrafts. Maybe the area I'm in is not enough dark (the area is yellowish in the Light Pollution map). Thanks for the motivation! Thumbs up! 👍
Great shot at condensing a lot of information. I think you meant lens focal length when you mentioned lens field of view, e.g. when using the 500 rule.
I said lens field of view instead of focal length because that number will change based on the crop factor of your camera sensor. A 35mm lens is still a 35mm lens regardless of the camera it's placed on but full-frame vs. APS-C that field of view changes, which is what gets inputted into the 500/NPF rules.
anyone notice the star trails in the reflection of the creek in his stacked composite? (16:35) I totally thought he was going to duplicate the clean star layer, make it a mirror image, and then warp it into the shape of the creek as it would have looked. would have been mad cool, but alas.
Nice video, I'm just not sold on the NPF rule in general. Trail size is the same regardless of pixel size (and it's pretty obvious from your example comparing 25s on A7s to 25s on A7rII, they are the same lenght despite different pitch), I find it a bit absurd to take out basically 30% of your exposure time (in your example going from 16s to 10s) just to have "point stars" when the trails would appear just as big as the one in the A7s. Another wrong aspect of the formula is taking into account the aperture which has little to no impact on trail lenght (inb4 yes, I've read the original article on the NPF rule but the explaination it gives it's a bit absurd, plus the author speaks, from what I've understood using the translator, like the optic is a diffraction limited system when it definitely isn't!). I've used the calculator on the site and when you take everything into account things really get weird. Let's use an "extreme" (but possible) scenario: compare a Sony A7rIV with a 24mm f/1.4 to an A7s with a 24mm f/4. NPF suggests that the time for the A7rIV is 6.5s (which is waay too short for a decent exposure) while the A7s suggested time 15.5s, two and a half time more! Unfortunately I don't have the equipment to make a comparison, but I'm sure that the trail from a 15s image are way bigger than those on a 6s image. If you take things to an absurd, like using an f/14 aperture (which admittedly nobody will, but it's not a good reason for the formula to fail miserably!), the suggested exposure time grows so much that it goes beyond the 500 rule... if stuff like that happens something with the formula is really wrong, because as I said aperture has almost no effect on the trail size ! My suggestion? No need to overcomplicate stuff, just use the 300 rule if you need numbers on the field, 250 if you really want to be conservative, otherwise just do some test shots and see for yourself what you think is an acceptable trail.
I agree with this completely... after doing my testing it was pretty obvious the NPF rule was unnecessarily complicated. Like you said, it's easier to just say "find the right shutter speed that results in no star trailing, whether that be the 400, 300, or 200 rule..." since like you said, the NPF rule can cut up to 30% in exposure time without much reduction in trailing. The effects with aperture size are also weird as you said because in some instances the exposure time just does not make sense! I would have re-done the video and eliminated the NPF rule but honestly I was too far along with the project to make any major edits like that so I left it in... I'll amend future videos mentioning the NPF rule to explain that the photographer should just find the right shutter speed themselves, after all, "acceptable" levels of star trails are really dependent on how large you want the photo printed, how you will be using the photo, and personal preference... Thanks for the detailed comment by the way, really appreciate it. The NPF rule is an interesting discussion for sure.
Hey, everyone, thanks for checking out my video. I first want to mention that Sonata Music reached out to me about sponsoring this video, and it was the perfect fit. I've been looking for a low-cost high-quality music licensing service for awhile now, and Sonata is the perfect solution. They make things easy with their great user-interface, affordable pricing, and the tracks themselves are high-quality and literally fit any mood I'm going for in a video. Check out Sonata music here: sonata.media/?..
Regarding the video, this was my longest project yet with over 2100 layers, realtime footage captured in the field, and hundreds of hours writing scripts, making illustrations, and animating. Astrophotography is my favorite photography genre and I hope this video helps you guys out. Feel free to leave your feedback in the comments section and stay tuned for more Apalapse content coming soon! Thanks!
woow, so much knowledge in one video. Appreciate it!
thank you, of course!
I can't believe how much I learned in 18mins!
Really well made videos, thank you.
Please make a video on how to talk with that deep voice.
Thank you, and I don't know if it's something I can make a video on, I guess I was just born with it haha
What's up! Thanks for you coming back and sharing such helpful video!
Hey! Just finished my semester and will be doing videos for basically the entire summer... I have some good stuff planned so stay tuned!!
The legend returned!
Yes he did! Thank you kindly!
Great presentation and excellent motion graphics used in your video.
thank you so much
Such a well produced video. Great for someone who is new to the hobby like me
Thank you so much, I'm glad it was helpful!
Amazing video as always! Would love to see a separate tutorial video on the whole editing process (especially on photo stacking) and maybe on the different softwares you used
good idea! thanks!
Really appreciate the work. Thanks a lot. Tonight I'll try to take photos of the Perseid meteor shower that will be visible in my city (I'll go to some darker areas). Photographing Milky Way is another thing to try tonight.
Thanks for the video!
Thanks for the support! I was out last night too but didn't see any Perseids :(. Definitely try some core shots too while you're at it! The core won't be around for much longer so shoot it while you can!
@@Apalapse Unfortunately I didn't saw any too :( I set a timelapse with my Osmo Pocket while capturing long-exposure photos with the Nikon D3200. The stars are round as intended thanks to this guide, but there were no meteors. The Osmo Pocket captured moving things (about 7 of them) but I think all of them are aircrafts. Maybe the area I'm in is not enough dark (the area is yellowish in the Light Pollution map).
Thanks for the motivation! Thumbs up! 👍
More power to your Channel. You are God Send to learning photographer’s like me!
Wow, thank you!
Thank u so much... Greetings from India...
Thank you for all the tips man, I’m always waiting for your new videos
You're welcome! I've been working on a big photography course for this summer - excited to release it in a couple months. Over 100 videos!
@@Apalapse I’ll be waiting for those videos
Very informative. Nicely explained. 🙏
Thank you so much 👍
Amazing bro!! you did it! That's really a helpful guide for everyone want to photograph the sky
keep up the great work ;)
Thanks, really appreciate it!
Another great video! Thanks man!
Thank you and of course!
Great shot at condensing a lot of information. I think you meant lens focal length when you mentioned lens field of view, e.g. when using the 500 rule.
I said lens field of view instead of focal length because that number will change based on the crop factor of your camera sensor. A 35mm lens is still a 35mm lens regardless of the camera it's placed on but full-frame vs. APS-C that field of view changes, which is what gets inputted into the 500/NPF rules.
Just a semantics thing, really, but I try to be as accurate as possible in order to not confuse people.
Dude no wayyyyy. I needed this
glad to help my man!
anyone notice the star trails in the reflection of the creek in his stacked composite? (16:35) I totally thought he was going to duplicate the clean star layer, make it a mirror image, and then warp it into the shape of the creek as it would have looked. would have been mad cool, but alas.
great vid apple boy :)!
hahahahaha
Finally another video :P
hahaha I know my upload schedule is terrible :(
Nice video, I'm just not sold on the NPF rule in general.
Trail size is the same regardless of pixel size (and it's pretty obvious from your example comparing 25s on A7s to 25s on A7rII, they are the same lenght despite different pitch), I find it a bit absurd to take out basically 30% of your exposure time (in your example going from 16s to 10s) just to have "point stars" when the trails would appear just as big as the one in the A7s.
Another wrong aspect of the formula is taking into account the aperture which has little to no impact on trail lenght (inb4 yes, I've read the original article on the NPF rule but the explaination it gives it's a bit absurd, plus the author speaks, from what I've understood using the translator, like the optic is a diffraction limited system when it definitely isn't!).
I've used the calculator on the site and when you take everything into account things really get weird.
Let's use an "extreme" (but possible) scenario: compare a Sony A7rIV with a 24mm f/1.4 to an A7s with a 24mm f/4. NPF suggests that the time for the A7rIV is 6.5s (which is waay too short for a decent exposure) while the A7s suggested time 15.5s, two and a half time more! Unfortunately I don't have the equipment to make a comparison, but I'm sure that the trail from a 15s image are way bigger than those on a 6s image.
If you take things to an absurd, like using an f/14 aperture (which admittedly nobody will, but it's not a good reason for the formula to fail miserably!), the suggested exposure time grows so much that it goes beyond the 500 rule... if stuff like that happens something with the formula is really wrong, because as I said aperture has almost no effect on the trail size !
My suggestion? No need to overcomplicate stuff, just use the 300 rule if you need numbers on the field, 250 if you really want to be conservative, otherwise just do some test shots and see for yourself what you think is an acceptable trail.
I agree with this completely... after doing my testing it was pretty obvious the NPF rule was unnecessarily complicated. Like you said, it's easier to just say "find the right shutter speed that results in no star trailing, whether that be the 400, 300, or 200 rule..." since like you said, the NPF rule can cut up to 30% in exposure time without much reduction in trailing. The effects with aperture size are also weird as you said because in some instances the exposure time just does not make sense! I would have re-done the video and eliminated the NPF rule but honestly I was too far along with the project to make any major edits like that so I left it in... I'll amend future videos mentioning the NPF rule to explain that the photographer should just find the right shutter speed themselves, after all, "acceptable" levels of star trails are really dependent on how large you want the photo printed, how you will be using the photo, and personal preference... Thanks for the detailed comment by the way, really appreciate it. The NPF rule is an interesting discussion for sure.
Great video
Glad you enjoyed it
BABE WAKE UP NEW APALAPSE VIDEO JUST DROPPED
that's the energy we need!
Thank you
you're welcome!
Amazing
Thank you! Cheers!
How the hell did I get here?
I don't know, but welcome!
Can I capture on a gopro since it is 14 mm?
yes, definitely!
@@Apalapse thank you!
sick
thanks Liam!
First
my man