Well yes and no. My specific mention of the stars Antares to Vega to the constellation Cassiopeia IS Northern Hemisphere centric. BUT the 3C3O method can work with absolutely any star in the sky. From one side of your pano to your other, just move along from image to image while moving a star of choice 3rd-center-3rd-off. They just won't be the same stars or at least in the same order as my image example coming from the Northern Hemisphere. I am really glad you brought this up and wish I had made a mention of that in my video. I am normally better at including the Southern Hemisphere but in this video I totally forgot! Appreciate you making note of it! -Aaron

@@PhotogAdventures Thanks Aaron appreciate your channel and the work you put into it 👍. Prior to using a geared 3 way head (eg Benro) I did use the method similar to what you describe and it definitely works. Now with the geared head I have memorised how many turns of the knob give me the required overlap for each of my focal lengths (20mm =10, 35mm = 6, 85mm = 4). Coming up repeatable techniques like these certainly makes life under the stars a more enjoyable and predictable experience 😊

@@GrowPhotography Thank you for saying that about my channel and my work on it. To be honest, I have been too pulled away from the KZfaq channel and my podcast the last few years and working to remedy that. Good start this year so far but need to get at least one new video out a week! :D Wow yeah, when you have the specifics of your gear down like that, then it makes execution very easy! I love that. Amen to that about more enjoyable and predictable. Milky Way Photography is one of the most accommodating as you don't to rush to get your image really ever as long as there are no clouds. The Milky Way meanders through our night sky at a pace that allows for plenty of time to create that dream shot. I love it :D -Aaron

@@PhotogAdventures I don't know how you manage one video a week - I consider myself doing well if I manage one a month 🤣

Thanks for saying that! Glad you watched the video and hope you keep coming back to the channel for more tips! 😃 -Aaron

Hey thanks, Jeroen! Hartelijk bedankt! :D -Aaron

You know it! Well kinda….sadly in August we won’t have the opportunity to do Milky Way Panoramas unless you like the idea of a vertical pano or extreme high Milky Way with 3-4 rows to get it all in. So yes technically possible but not easy or ideal. What you should bone up on for August is your blue hour blending, long-exposure foreground blending and your compositional prowess when dealing with a vertical nearly vertical Milky Way core. THAT is the stuff we will be doing a lot more of! -Aaron

I know that frustration of hoping the weather complies…Oh the agony when nature decides otherwise! I appreciate the extra kind words about my Timelapse tip sheet too! Thank you for adding that! Hope you keep coming back for more and make my KZfaq channel a home for your Milky Way Photography. 😃 -Aaron

Yes! This is definitely the gear-powered solution. That’s awesome you have that setup and have become proficient in it. Most don’t have that setup for sure. Also, GREAT ADDITION by bringing up PlanIt Pro for pano planning. I LOVE that feature in the app. I really need to do a video on that next! 😃 -Aaron

Thank you for saying so, Brandi! Love that you have come to my channel to learn about Milky Way Photography. Hope you will keep coming back for more! :D -Aaron

You know I wonder how much it actually does. I mean, on the merging sections there is shared data but I am not sure if a mean/average filter is applied in the blending of the two but wouldn't be surprised if that did happen. I will admit to being a member of the "it works so I didn't look under the hood to see how it worked" generation. So I haven't looked up what steps Adobe Lightroom for example goes through to apply the blend of images together. If it does add a stacking effect, then even a little extra WIN for the overkill 70% overlap :D Thanks for the great comment and positive attitude as always, John! :D Great to hear from you! Looks like you might be watching today's Facebook live too from what I saw. That would be great if you could join in from Australia! -Aaron

@@PhotogAdventures Thanks for your comment as I do tend to overlap a Lot when I'm tracking to make sure it does stitch when I'm spending hours on end tracking these tracked panorama's ( as you mentioned with that Panorama you showcase a few months back) I had over 90 images in it and you did say you could do it with less panels? Not sure where I saw / heard about the stacking effect but it was someone who knows what they are doing who mentioned it so who know?

Nodal rail/slide is very useful to prevent issues with the parallax effect. You do need subjects closer to the camera to have a visible parallax effect. So depending on your foreground scenery, it could be overkill since you likely don't have any parallax issues. While the use of a Nodal slide is great, I have never found it necessary in my Milky Way Photography Panoramas. But to answer your question more directly: Yes you would get better results so long as you have a parallax effect you need to mitigate. For the scene I showed here in my video, it was not necessary. Thanks for the compliment and really appreciate you coming to my channel to watch this video! Hope you keep coming back for more! -Aaron

Heya Mark Smith! Thank you for trying to see my gear list...I recently updated the wordpress on my PhotogAdventures.com site and it broke the page! I have to wipe it completely and go through the laborious re-upload or start fresh to fix it but I haven't taken the time to do that enough yet. My cursory attempts have failed with backups etc and so I have a bigger project to fix it. Your looking for those links to work emphasize that I need to hurry more there. To answer your question: This is not focal length dependent. Now, the amount of images you take and which stars you jump from WILL change with the wider or narrower focal length you choose. You will notice in my example of me at the camera I had extra images because of the scene and you can pretend it was a different focal length which caused me to require more images as I move across the far right to the far left. But the principle of choosing a visible star and moving it from 3rd-Center-3rd-Off is still the same. So whether you use a 15mm or a 35mm, you can use this method. You will just have fewer images and use different stars on the 15mm than what you would end up with on the 35mm. That make sense? As for recommendations, it is always easier to avoid edge distortions using a focal length 20mm-35mm and still remain pretty wide for a focal length. Lenses like the 14mm options have more edge shape warping. THAT SAID I have been 100% successful with both options and only make my lens choice preference based on the foreground. If I have a wide vista for a foreground AND I want to keep it all in just one row, then I must use a wide angle lens like my 15mm Tamron. If I have an intimate foreground like this Sunset Arch in Escalante, and I don't need to include a huge expanse of land in my foreground, then just using my 24mm Rokinon (like I used in this image) is sufficient. But BOTH LENSES create great panos and I am successful at stitching using either. Hope that helps! -Aaron

Groetjes, Johan! Yeah exactly. I really wish I had included a section on that. Like I have said to others in the comments, I normally am better at a nod at least to the Southern Hemisphere but this time I was completely focused only on the specifics from the North. But you nailed it, the principle of 3C3O is the same. Just pick any star you want. Even for those in the Northern Hemisphere, they aren't ALWAYS or even USUALLY going to end up following Antares, Altair, and Deneb across the sky. They will just see what stars they see and move to the next third. My workshop group last night had different experiences with what stars they could see on their cameras. From the Fujifilm that Jeff had to the Nikon Z9 that Nichole was using. They had different stars stand out than what stands out normally on my Canon 5DMiv and it changes nothing. Still 3rd-Center-3rd-Off and soon the sky was fully captured! It works like a charm! :D Thanks for watching and it's cool to meet someone I am assuming is from South Africa! I lived in the Netherlands so I am partial to Dutch/Afrikaans. Hope you keep coming back to the channel! :D -Aaron

@@PhotogAdventures Thanks Aaron. I am Afrikaans speaking but live just above SA in Namibia. We have a lot of open skies and little rain clouds to block the stars. I will definitely try your method.

Actually answered the same question with MStraiteFamily earlier, allow me to just copy and paste my answer from that: “Nodal rail/slide is very useful to prevent issues with the parallax effect. You do need subjects closer to the camera to have a visible parallax effect. So depending on your foreground scenery, it could be overkill since you likely don't have any parallax issues. While the use of a Nodal slide is great, I have never found it necessary in my Milky Way Photography Panoramas. But to answer your question more directly: Yes you would get better results so long as you have a parallax effect you need to mitigate. For the scene I showed here in my video, it was not necessary.“ I hope you don’t mind the copying of my answer! 😇-Aaron

Oh yes, it really comes down to your location and what time you are capturing to dictate how many rows you will need to include the foreground. IF you CAN get all of the foreground in and the stars by just barely cutting off Vega, then a single row will do. But when it doesn't work, you will have to add a second row. You may even cut off Vega even more if you have to, but you just have to be careful to still give your Milky Way arch the headroom it needs to not be weirdly warped at the top when panorama merged. The safest way to describe that to people learning is to say: "Get up to Vega and either include right at the top or cut it off and you will be sure that you have enough headroom to avoid issues." But you can cut off anywhere that works best for you and your inclusion of the foreground. That makes sense? As for where to start: ALWAYS START WITH SKY! The risk of clouds forming or moving in is too great. I always remind people that the foreground isn't going anywhere, so prioritize the sky that COULD get ruined with new clouds. As far as starting LEFT or from the RIGHT that depends on what you are doing. IF you are using a Star Tracker, then you could benefit starting from the LEFT SIDE in the Northern Hemisphere because that side moves the least and by the time you get to the galactic core it will merge pretty decently still. BUT if you are just doing a single image panorama like in my example, then starting from the RIGHT is easy and not a problem. You capture image to image quick enough that there is zero issue connecting the frames in the merge. For single image panoramas you can start on either side and have the same success. I always start at the galactic core because of the risk of new clouds. I would rather capture the core without clouds and if clouds should form during those two mins, the clouds will block the lesser side of the milky way arch. Then after I nailed my sky images I would capture another row in order to include my foreground. Thanks for watching my video, Avanindrabhatia! -Aaron

@@PhotogAdventures Thanks for the detailed information.

My name is Aaron King. Thanks Omer Ali for coming to my channel and watching! Hope I will become a home for you when learning Milky Way Photography! -Aaron

@@PhotogAdventuresi Subscribe to you

@@PhotogAdventures I Subscribed To you

@@OmerAli-qp7jx Woohoo! Right on and thank you! :D -Aaron

@@PhotogAdventures You are welcome

How do you mean? That it was too quick of a term and vague for what I meant? The “guide stars” term was just a quick way to say “these stars are your markers for your edges of the panorama. Right book end is Antares. Left book end is the constellation Cassiopeia and the marker for what the highest point of your panorama is Vega.” Did I make that too short of a description? Sorry if I did. I just felt it made the video too long to say more about it when I reference them the rest of the video over and over. -Aaron

@@PhotogAdventures some of us have no desire to be astronomers. I really don't want to learn the guide stars and I believe there are many like me. Not to worry, I've taken quite a few without learning the guide stars. No problem, keep 'em coming.

@@lefturn99 Oh okay sure thing. Sounds like the way I spoke about them that quickly was something you actually appreciated then. I was afraid "lost me" meant that you wanted to learn but I made it confusing. You certainly don't have to learn astronomy to tackle this, but I think knowing three things like Antares, Vega and the constellation Cassiopeia is not too much. Certainly you know the words for Cactus and Mountain and where to look for them in other photography, so I imagine that it would still fit in your threshold of what you want to learn and what you don't. Thanks for clarifying, lefturn99! Appreciate you coming back and replying! Thanks for the encouragement to keep the videos coming and hope you will return as well! -Aaron

Not really. Yes I mention specific stars that are bookends for our Milky Way up here in the Northern Hemisphere. But while your bookends are entirely different stars, using the 3rd-Center-3rd-Off method still works exactly as expected. Like I said above to another comment, I am disappointed that I forgot to mention the Southern Hemisphere and how it would work differently there. I am normally better at including the Southern Hemisphere but since I had these image examples from the Northern Hemisphere I totally forgot to mention the South. Sorry about that! But the method is still useful, just need to pick any stars you would like and go from there. Thanks for watching my video! Hope you keep coming back to the channel! -Aaron

@@PhotogAdventures I agree that the 3rd Center 3rd Off is a great technique and it’s one I’ll try.

Right on! Thanks! It’s only truly useful if you love the idea of not checking markers on your ballhead as you go or just can’t turn on lights to see them. But I personally love not having to turn on any lights and I get to just go and build that pano with very little thought. Like I said, under 2mins and I got two rows of a pano complete at my 8second shutter. It’s nice keeping things quick and simple. 😃 Thanks for the reply! -Aaron