The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
A single frame taken last week. I was in Canberra for a few days and went out to Lake George, behind a hill chain and some 30Km from the city. It was clear, cold (by our standards) and very still. The Emu is the traditional Aboriginal description of this area of the Milky Way where they connect the dark areas to generate the shape of the bird. It says something about the clarity of the sky further out west and the sensitivity of their eyes. The Southern Cross is located at the Emu’s head. There has been a fair bit of work to bring the Emu to life, mostly in the area of an S curve in the sky and removing some vegetation highlights from a nearby low pressure sodium lamp left out of frame
Specific Feedback
Should the entire photo be lighter to reveal more of the land and lake? Should I remove some more stars and/or the reflections on the lake? There is a fair bit of converging vertical distortion so the reflections do not align with the stars themselves.
Technical Details
Canon 90D, F3.5 as ISO 6400, 25 sec, Sigma 10mm to 20mm at 10mm, Starscape orange light filter. (The lens gives just over a 90 deg vertical)
I’m only a casual Milky Way observer and have only photographed a few times, so take my response with a grain of salt… About all I can identify in the night sky are a few planets and the moon…
I really like how you’ve filled the frame with the Milky Way. As to your question about the brightness of the land/lake, personally I think it’s good the way you’ve processed and presented. The “land” honestly doesn’t look all that compelling and so I don’t think making it light would be an improvement. The lake itslef, I think the reflections are good and also brightness appropriate for the night image. I do see some brightness in the lower right sky, which I 'm assuming are distant city light? Not much to be done about that unless you want to burn that area down a little. No biggie there.
Again, sorry I can’t offer any processing or other suggestions. I think this came out great as you’ve presented.
Wonderful!! Detail in the MW is fantastic – good processing and very clear air! Stars look very good with a distribution of sizes – not easy with regular daytime cameras and lenses. Tonalities of the lake, the reflection and the near FG look good. My only small suggestions are to maybe darken the UR corner and to wish for a slightly cooler WB, but that is artist’s choice, for sure.
I am so jealous of your upside-down MW down there! The galactic center will be well overhead soon – it never gets far enough above the horizon in the US – hope we get to see more of it then!
Thank you all for your comments. The lighter sky on the rhs is due to the town of Bungendore, some 8Km away and I left the glow there because it is there. I think that is my personal taste, others are certainly welcome to differ. The foreground is definitely not photo worthy and thus was left as mostly a silhouette. I have previously noticed the light levels and colour balance to be different above and below the Milky Way, a bit like a rainbow effect. I would be pleased to hear whether other people have noticed this, perhaps due to there being more air between the Milky way and I as the angle of observation moves South and down. Regarding our upside down Milky Way, it does depend on where your feet are! We get bunny ears up in the evening and bunny ears down in the morning. Oh, it is good to live downunder!
About all I can identify in the night sky are a few planets and the moon… 