|
Using predicted pass details, I had a good idea what path the now de-orbited Mir space station (below) would take across the sky. I selected the wider, 35mm lens to give the Mir time to approach and enter the wider field. I closed the shutter at a pre-determined point to satisfy myself that the spacecraft (be it altogether imperceptible) would actually be captured in the frame. The same approach was used to photograph the Shuttle Endeavour, below, as it crossed the sky between the planet Saturn and the brighter Jupiter as viewed from Bedford Community Stadium in extreme Southeast Michigan around 7:28 p.m. local time on Feb. 16, 2000. In a sense, the "ideal" technique is dictated by many factors. A wider, 35mm f2.8 lens, for instance, may capture more of a satellite's path with inherently less star trailing, thus allowing for a longer exposure under a darker sky or for a fainter object. A "faster" (larger maximum aperture) 50mm f1.4 or f1.8 lens can allow for shorter exposures but, as a tighter shot, risks greater star trailing or misplacement of an object's anticipated location within the frame. If large prints are the goal, 400 ISO film may be a better choice than 800 speed but a worse one if, for instance, your fastest lens is only rated f3.5.
It's all matter of personal preference, equipment availability and, above all, trial and error. Accept that much experimentation will be necessary. Note: Since their equipment is automatically calibrated to average values to grey, prints from one-hour labs—even prints made from acceptably exposed negatives—will often look washed out unless the lab is instructed beforehand to adjust the exposure several densities darker.
|
