What Would You Want a Book to Cover in How to Do Astrophotography?

[astrostu]

Last summer (2008), I posted a thread over on TPF about a possible book I was thinking of developing (http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/beyond-basics/130009-book-length-guide-astrophotography-regular-cameras.html) that would discuss, in effect, how to do astrophotography with modern consumer-level cameras (and dSLRs). The idea seemed to have interest on that forum.

In short, the book idea was to cover the basics of exposure and how shutter speed, aperture, and ISO play together, why there's noise, specifics on photographing the moon, star trails, and constellations, more general information on other things like meteor showers, and then how to process the photos to reduce noise, how to use levels and curves, etc. I was also thinking about including some of the science behind what you're photographing (like why the moon is red during a total lunar eclipse).

The project stopped with that thread due to other projects and real work, though now I'm thinking of getting back to trying to put it together.

My purpose for this post is to ask the question: What would YOU want to see in such a book? If you picked up a book entitled something like, "Astrophotography with a Modern Consumer Camera," what information would you want it to have? Even if it's within the scope that I mentioned above, please mention it again so that I know someone would actually be interested in it.

[icassell]

I'd love to see a book like this. Just PLEASE don't put in the "mandatory" chapters that tell about basic camera function, exposure, etc. that seem to waste half of every digital photography book. One would hope the reader understood the basics of photography and that your book could step up from there.

[astrostu]

I'd love to see a book like this. Just PLEASE don't put in the "mandatory" chapters that tell about basic camera function, exposure, etc. that seem to waste half of every digital photography book. One would hope the reader understood the basics of photography and that your book could step up from there.

I don't think such information would make up half of the book, more like 1 chapter or section out of like 15 or 20. While you may think (hope?) that people would know this, it still amazes me how many people don't understand that an f/2.8 lens shooting at f/2.8 is not very sharp, or that shooting the moon at ISO 800 and a shutter speed of 1/2000 sec is bad. While in many normal applications, it doesn't matter quite as much, astrophotography is one of the most unforgiving kinds of photography in terms of noise and sharpness. You could always skip that section. ;)

But I'm glad that you would like to see such a book (about the astrophotography stuff if not the basics on exposure, anyway). :boogie:

[PhotoJet]

Yeah, see... I think a chapter on the 'basics' is necessary. It goes back to something a person on another thread used to say... "buy a camera and you are a photographer...buy a piano, and you own a piano." ;) So there are many people out there going to town with their digital cameras who have no idea how to do what you do... stu. (Phew!) :lol:

I guess my suggestion would be to follow the KISS principle. There are a thousand books I totally reject just on the basis of 'attitude.' No one really cares how smart the author is or how many $2.00 words they use.

The key is... can I pick up the book, read it and come away with something I can use? Be concrete and concise. Give practical examples and show people what that looks like. Use lots of illustrations and photos. If I am learning something new, it takes me three times longer to learn if all I have is 'words.' If I have a few simple drawings, pictures, photos, whatever, my learning time is much smaller. One thing I almost forgot... part of that key is will I read it? If something doesn't grab me right out of the gate, I'm out of there... short attention span or something! haha ;)

I think your book idea is strong and I guess I'd suggest you take a look at what is out there now about it. Take a discerning look at other books on the subject and tear them apart... see what you would do better and how you would get things across to people who have never done this, but are interested. Go for it! :)

[sleepingdragon]

I agree with Jeanette the simpler the terminology the better. Some books get me so lost. They now just collect dust.

Maybe have a section for beginners and another for more advanced users.

[Antarctican]

I too think including a chapter on the basics is a good idea.

I struggle with getting good moon shots, but that is obviously something that will be in the book. How to get good eclipse shots (like you got and posted elsewhere). Maybe the best way(s) to take timed shots showing the movement of stars at night. How to take pics through a telescope (I seem to recall someone took and posted some great pics that way). How to photograph the Northern Lights. Are these the kind of suggestions you were after?

[astrostu]

I too think including a chapter on the basics is a good idea.

I struggle with getting good moon shots, but that is obviously something that will be in the book. How to get good eclipse shots (like you got and posted elsewhere). Maybe the best way(s) to take timed shots showing the movement of stars at night. How to take pics through a telescope (I seem to recall someone took and posted some great pics that way). How to photograph the Northern Lights. Are these the kind of suggestions you were after?

Yep, those are the kinds of suggestions I'm after. :)

It sounds like I may have to hold myself back on getting too complicated ... need to find a good editor. And run it by my mom ... if she can't understand it, then I need to re-word it (not to put down my mom; she's educated and was a psychiatric nurse, but not technologically inclined at all).

[icassell]

I guess the problem I have is that every book on photography these days seems to think it needs to start at the beginning. Why can't we have some books on specialized topics (such as this) that concentrate on the topic at hand and teach the subject, rather than teaching the basic principles of photography all over again. I understand that certain basics may need a bit of refinement to show how they apply to this topic. That's fine -- include them. I don't want to see :This is a lens ... this is an f-stop ... etc.

[Fox Paw]

What little I've read on this subject left me with the impression that the cost of getting into it was more than my interest justified. I'd be interested in seeing how to take such photos without spending a fortune, even if some quality had to be sacrificed.

[astrostu]

What little I've read on this subject left me with the impression that the cost of getting into it was more than my interest justified. I'd be interested in seeing how to take such photos without spending a fortune, even if some quality had to be sacrificed.

The point of it is to show the maximum of what you can do with the minimum amount of equipment -- from a handheld P&S through a DSLR mounted on a telescope, and perhaps even a little checklist at the top of each section of what equipment is needed or highly recommended for each kind of thing in the context of what's talked about towards the beginning.

[Ghastly]

You should also consider explaining a bit about the movement of the bodies, and also how to identify each one. Maybe this last part through references and some charts?