[canajuneh]

The aurora was dancing last night and is likely going to do a repeat performance tonight. I haven't taken aurora shots in bright moonlight before and wonder if anyone has any helpful hints. How do I set the camera for maximum performance - do I change the ISO from my usual 200-400 - shorten the shutter speed - use a higher aperture?????

[jbinpg]

Sorry to seem so abrupt...but you have a digital camera. Experimentation will cost you nothing but time.

[canajuneh]

True enough, and that is what I did last night. However, I have found that I can also learn from others who have more experience with a particular subject matter. Responses here won't stop me from going out tonight (weather permitting) to try again.

Was the aurora active in Prince George last night? I heard it was beautiful in Peace River.

[riff]

You should post a photo or two of last nights adventure, I expect that will garner better replies (then this one).

[jbinpg]

Would never have been able to tell since it was overcast all night. Even had a skiff of snow. Winter isn't over yet !!

[John Poirier]

The aurora was dancing last night and is likely going to do a repeat performance tonight. I haven't taken aurora shots in bright moonlight before and wonder if anyone has any helpful hints. How do I set the camera for maximum performance - do I change the ISO from my usual 200-400 - shorten the shutter speed - use a higher aperture?????

Hi. I've nver shot northen lights with a digital, but during the 30 years I lived north of 60 I did lots of film work. i've also done plenty of digital shooting, just not northen lights. Wthout knowing what camera you are using, I have a couple of suggestions.

I suggest that you take advantage of the high ISO performance of your camera, which is almost certain to be superior to film. Experiment to see how high you can go while keeping noise at acceptable levels.

I don't know what you have for lenses. In my experience with quite a wide assortment of fast wide angles I've found that closing down a stop or two results in very significant improvements in sharpness as well as greater DOF. In northen lights photography, this translates to much better rendering of foreground objects such as trees or mountains which are usually required to give northern lights images scale, depth and framing.

If you are working with slower zooms, you can still experiment with juggling high ISO vs. stopping down to see what compromises might work.

i've seen some very fine digital northern lights work, including some going back to the late 1990s. I think the potential is great.

Have fun!

John

[adelorenzo]

I have been shooting ISO 100, daylight white balance for my aurora shots. I shoot with a large aperture (2.5 - 4.0) and usually between 10-15 second exposures. My style is to keep the sky dark and more like what my eye sees, rather than what the camera sees (which is a lot more aurora).

That being said, my shots are nowhere near as good as local photographer David Cartier who shoots 1000-1600 ISO digitally or 800 film. So maybe I should try something else. (Seriously, check out his pics.)

I'll post a couple of examples, but check out David's as well. You can click on the camera name to view the EXIF information to see how they were shot.

Of course, the real key is staying up all night and getting away from city lights. I haven't been dedicated enough to get the really best shots. I like my sleep too much.

Supposed to be a major solar storm tonight but we are 100% cloudy right now.

[MSL]

That being said, my shots are nowhere near as good as local photographer David Cartier who shoots 1000-1600 ISO digitally or 800 film. So maybe I should try something else. (Seriously, check out his pics.)

You two have very different styles, and I'm not sure I'd say Cartier's is better. He's pulling out more colors and captures the trees as more than just dark objects, but you have a pretty intense shape in that second image that has its own visual appeal.

[fewing1]

I was out taking pics of the lights on Tuesday night..I found that my best shots came with shorter time..any where from 5 to 10 sec and exposure about 400..on darker nights with no moon I have been getting pretty good pics with about a 20 to 30 seconds. I was so bummed out that it was cloudy here in the peace river area last night..some of the pics that are being posted on facebook are just amazing. Hoping tonight will be clear..Here is a link for the aurora forecast for canada. Current Regional Geomagnetic Conditions helps me decide if I'm going to stay up late

[ok2day]

I shot it last night ISO 800, f3.5, 15 seconds & sometimes 20 seconds.

Did the same at ISO 400, as one of the other posters said, you have nothing to lose but time--you can shoot it & look to see what you like.

[jbinpg]

Here is a link for a near realtime solar activity graph at geostationary satellite altitude (35,786 km). GOES-13 is at longitude 75W and is the GOES-E weather satellite for eastern North America..

3-day GOES Proton Flux Monitor

Jack

[jac]

Here's a link which can start you off with a few ideas. I seldom go more than 800 ISO (K5), use the widest aperture (f4 on the 12-24mm), auto WB, pre-focus at infinity, 20 - 30 seconds depending on the intensity and keep an eye on the histogram. On this site you'll find a link to the U. of Alaska, Fairbanks which can give you predictions. They'll also email if there is something big coming. Like tonight - level 6 ++ which is about the most intense you'll find. A big BUT. The numbers above are what I use with a waxing or waning crescent moon or less. Tonight it's still nearly full. So you'll have to play with things a bit due to the moonshine. However, if the aurora don't work out, play with the moonshine :-)
How to photograph the northern lights with a digital camera.

[canajuneh]

Thank you guys for your suggestions. A special thank you to fewing1 for the link - I hadn't found that one during my net searching.

I assume the aurora was spectacular last night behind those heavy clouds. I'll hope for some luck tonight!

[emalvick]

I have been shooting ISO 100, daylight white balance for my aurora shots. I shoot with a large aperture (2.5 - 4.0) and usually between 10-15 second exposures. My style is to keep the sky dark and more like what my eye sees, rather than what the camera sees (which is a lot more aurora).

That being said, my shots are nowhere near as good as local photographer David Cartier who shoots 1000-1600 ISO digitally or 800 film. So maybe I should try something else. (Seriously, check out his pics.)

I'll post a couple of examples, but check out David's as well. You can click on the camera name to view the EXIF information to see how they were shot.

Of course, the real key is staying up all night and getting away from city lights. I haven't been dedicated enough to get the really best shots. I like my sleep too much.

Supposed to be a major solar storm tonight but we are 100% cloudy right now.

I haven't even finished reading this thread or looked at the other photographer's links, but your shots are fantastic. You shouldn't sell yourself short.

I am going to Iceland next fall, and my wife and I are both hoping we'll get to see some Aurora on our trip. We live in California, so it almost never makes it this far south, although I know of people who have seen it in dark locations on extremely rare occasions. The one time I tried, I'm pretty sure it wasn't dark enough, and I am also pretty sure I didn't give it patience. I tend to like my sleep, too. I'll probably make exceptions when I get to Iceland.