shooting the stars

[ivan delenda]

Hello,

i will be shooting soon in a desert, some of scenes are basicly night-shot stars.

my producer told me that it s impossible to get stars on a film , and he said i have to find alternative ways ...

is that true ?

if not , anyone knows , if it s possible, and what s the tric , shutter speed, lens , and film i have to use ?

 

thanks

ivan

[Joseph White]

i'd say shoot 5218, push it one stop, and get yourself a set of nice fast lenses - like zeiss super speeds or master primes if they're avilable where you are. i'd also suggest, if you have the film and the time, that you bracket exposures (shoot at a couple different f-stops) just to give yourself a little wiggle room in post. if the stars are nice and bright - especially somewhere like the desert where there isn't a lot of light pollution, you should definitely see them.

 

best of luck!

[Stephen Williams]

Hello,

i will be shooting soon in a desert, some of scenes are basicly night-shot stars.

my producer told me that it s impossible to get stars on a film , and he said i have to find alternative ways ...

is that true ?

if not , anyone knows , if it s possible, and what s the tric , shutter speed, lens , and film i have to use ?

 

thanks

ivan

 

Hi,

 

If there is no Live Action acting its very easy, just use a slow frame rate!

 

Stephen

[Dickson Sorensen]

Don't expect to discover any new galaxies this way.

[David Mullen ASC]

I don't think you'll get bright enough stars on a movie camera except when doing time lapse, and then the stars rotate across the sky visibly. Usually this would be an efx shot. You could even do it yourself with double-exposure if the shots are locked-off and you can create a realistic starfield -- small pinholes punched into a black showcard, backed with diffusion (like tracing paper) and backlit. The key is finding a realistic size for the pinholes -- smaller is better, but not so small that they can't show up.

 

If this is for video only, then just combine them or add them in post. This is assuming you are adding stars to a day-for-night or dusk-for-night landscape. If you are only shooting stars in the sky with no landscape, then just fake it with the pinholes-in-black card technique (if for print) or create them in a computer (if for video only).

[ivan delenda]

thanks guys,,,

i cant afford very speed Zeiss, so i ll go for double exposure.if i ll discover any new galaxy , i ll make you know :)

[Dickson Sorensen]

If you hang clear film leader in an array behind the cards you can make them twinkle.

[ivan delenda]

what if i have Konvas 2m ? i there any special advice ?

Edited October 16, 2005 by ivan delenda

[Ilmari Reitmaa]

Just to throw in some numbers, nightsky photographs with stars visible usually have specs something like f/2.8, ISO 800, 4-10 secs exposure plus you only get stars in the brighter range - if you're located well outside any urban light pollution. The faintest stars visible to naked eye are some ten stops below the brightest. So you'll definitely be better off doing double-exposure, as suggested.