
Placing My Camera Lens 300 Feet from a Rocket Launch - rdoherty
https://petapixel.com/2018/03/02/result-placing-camera-lens-300-feet-rocket-launch/
======
js2
Please click through to the photographer's web site. He's captured some really
nice images. My three favorites:

\- "January 7th, 2018: SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket launches the classified Zuma
payload for Northrup Grumman, and lands the first stage of the Falcon 9 back
at Cape Canaveral eight minutes after launch"

\- "June 11th, 2016: United Launch Alliance's massive Delta IV Heavy rocket
launches a top-secret satellite, designated NROL-37, on behalf of the National
Reconnaissance Office"

\- "November 19th, 2016: A United Launch Alliance Atlas V 541 rocket launches
NASA and NOAA's GOES-R satellite"

There doesn't seem to be a way to link directly to the images. They are hosted
on a CDN with an auth hash which I think will expire, so search for the date
here:

[http://johnkrausphotos.com](http://johnkrausphotos.com)

He's 18 BTW. At first I misread that he'd been a photographer for 18 years.
Bravo.

~~~
mikeash
I’ve been following his career on the SpaceX subreddit. He’d talk about
getting out of school to photograph a launch, or occasionally being unable to
do so. For a while he was unable to take close-up pictures because they
decided not to accredit minors. He’s quite a guy!

------
matthewmcg
Here's the OP's site:
[http://johnkrausphotos.com/](http://johnkrausphotos.com/)

Even if he's hard on his gear, his images are great and he's only 18.
Impressive work for a teenager.

~~~
colmvp
Even as an adult, I wouldn't be able to get those images. I've always wondered
how are photographers able to get such clarity for subjects that can be
extremely blurry/murky/muddy, such as smoke and even water? Every time I take
photos of clouds or water, it always looks dull.

~~~
sangnoir
> Every time I take photos of clouds or water, it always looks dull.

If your image is well-lit, in focus and doesn't have motion blur, you are
probably just missing post-processing. Most pictures will look rather dull
until they are touched-up to make them 'pop' \- you can have a look at the
before and after images from this Google AI research project[1] that processes
landscape photos to make them more pleasing to the eye.

Playing around with brightness, contrast, saturation and color curves can
greatly improve a photo.

1\. [https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/14/15973712/google-ai-
resear...](https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/14/15973712/google-ai-research-
street-view-panorama-photo-editing)

~~~
colmvp
Unfortunately, that's what I thought as it means I have to greatly improve my
post-processing skills.

Do you have tutorials that go into detail about how one can improve? I've
spent the last decade using Lightroom but largely going by what feels right
rather than being more technical and deliberate.

~~~
exodust
A good post-processing tip is to apply two passes of Unsharp Mask. The first
pass adds a general "punch", the second sharpens the fine details.

A good starting point for unsharp mask:

1st pass: Amount 10; Radius 30; Threshold: 0 2nd pass: Amount 100; Radius 0.3;
Threshold: 0

Adjust amount based on your judgement. Don't over-sharpen. Sharpening should
be the last step after resizing. Obviously always sharpen with the image at
100% zoom. Don't let your DSLR sharpen the image. Shoot in RAW, but resist
sharpening at your RAW tweaking stage - just do exposure tweaks at that point,
then bring into Photoshop for sharpening and resizing.

Also play with polarizing filters on your lens; ND filters so you can open up
aperture to exploit the sweet spot of your lens; reduce your exposure
compensation in daylight (my DSLR is always set two stops under); use a lens
hood; avoid too much cropping, instead get the framing and focal length right
when shooting.

------
mrbill
A friend mentioned that in the high-dollar government lab he works in, they
use a blast shield and a mirror in these applications. Mirror is a lot cheaper
to replace than some of their lenses.

~~~
hinkley
But it does make it harder to stabilize the image. Especially when the
decibels are high like in a launch.

~~~
raverbashing
It's a daylight photo, use a fast shutter

------
donquichotte
Wow, those images are gorgeous.

"We were warned by our NASA escort to not touch our faces after handling
equipment coated in the solid rocket exhaust and to wash our hands ASAP after
arriving back at the KSC Press Site."

Next picture: touches exhaust residue with bare hands. Please, use gloves!

"Using a glass filter triples the area that dew can form prior to liftoff."

A-ha, it is time to start building heated glass filters for rocket photography
enthusiasts!

~~~
alex_hitchins
What would the substances have been on the glass? I assume it would be
something nasty but my chemistry is poor. Also, do workers wear haz-mat suits
when working in the area? I'd guess there is a lot of the same stuff on the
ground/atmosphere that could be inhaled. The ecological damage of launches is
something I should really look more in to.

~~~
packetized
HTPB, unburnt ammonium perchlorate, aluminum powder.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxyl-
terminated_polybutadi...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxyl-
terminated_polybutadiene)

~~~
ridgeguy
And the combustion products include lots of water and hydrogen chloride, which
combine to form hydrochloric acid. The gritty aluminum oxide (another
combustion product) is probably a pretty good particulate sponge for holding
acid as it cools below HCl's condensation point.

~~~
alex_hitchins
Thanks both for the reply. Is the Aluminimum oxide forming part of a thermite
style reaction then?

~~~
tropo
Somewhat yes. Iron oxide is included, but considered a catalyst.

The rubbery plastic binder is a fuel. The Aluminum is a high-energy fuel. The
"ammonium" part of ammonium perchlorate is a fuel, and the "perchlorate" part
is an oxidizer.

The amount of aluminum is limited to prevent the temperature from getting too
high and because it makes low-energy exhaust particles. Good exhaust particles
are low-mass gasses with few degrees of freedom in the molecular shape.
Aluminum oxide forms solid particles consisting of many atoms stuck together,
which is pretty useless.

------
ilamont
The soil around the launch site must be loaded with acidic exhaust particles
and other residue, yet grass still grows right up to the edge of the platform.
That's one tough variety!

~~~
got2surf
Probably St. Augustine grass
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Augustine_Grass](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Augustine_Grass))
given that it is Florida.

St. Augustine is so tough, it even crowds out weeds! Not as soft as the
Bermuda grass on golf courses, but very resilient.

~~~
DoubleCribble
I'm pretty sure Bermuda grass can never be killed. No matter what you do to
it, it always comes back. It's the athlete's foot of lawn pests.

~~~
Taniwha
In Berkeley ~25 years ago we had a severe frost, pipes popped, the eugenia
hedge dies and so did the bermuda grass lawns too .. we pulled them and
replaced them with traditional sod

So ... yes it can be killed ....

~~~
DoubleCribble
Did you dig the Bermuda grass out of the ground? Physically removing every
blade, runner and root nodule it is the only way I know of to get rid of it.

~~~
Hextinium
All the Bermuda grass in our yard in Texas died after 3+ years of 90 days over
100 while the Saint Agustin keeps growing and growing.

------
hw
"the sound alone would kill anyone standing at the launchpad during liftoff."

Didn't know you could die from sound. Curious as to how that works.

~~~
saganus
I imagine the sound pressure would liquefy your organs.

Just speculating here but a "sound wave" at those energies could be similar to
a shock wave from an explosive.

------
sgrytoyr
One of his images is very similar to a really nice gif of the rockets firing
that was featured on reddit the other day (by another photographer):
[https://www.reddit.com/r/woahdude/comments/81xnmv/i_could_st...](https://www.reddit.com/r/woahdude/comments/81xnmv/i_could_stare_at_these_rocket_flames_for_hours/)

------
zaarn
I severely recommend using a mirror, that's how everyone does (and did) it.

A well cleaned mirror won't look any worse than straight through the lense.

~~~
platz
Won't the mirror collect dew?

~~~
robotresearcher
And vibrate independently of the camera.

~~~
bdamm
Whether vibration is from the camera or the mirror does not matter; both will
reduce quality on the image, assuming a slow exposure. But these exposures
look very fast. Even so, if the camera can be made stable, then so surely too
can a mirror.

~~~
robotresearcher
> both will reduce quality on the image

Yep. So why have two instead of one?

~~~
bdamm
Why blow hundreds or thousands of dollars on damaging and replacing lenses?
Photography doesn't generally pay well enough to afford that for very long.

~~~
dagw
"I’d likely be able to replace just the front element, but I picked up this
lens for a hundred bucks, so if I want to do a fisheye shot for a future
launch, I’ll probably just buy another one."

Basically any setup to protect the lens will end up costing about as much as
the lens.

~~~
zaarn
A 30x30cm Mirror (which is enough to get the image to the camera) costs about
12$ with a quick google search. It's even high quality silver.

With a small price at the start you can probably 3D print an apparatus that
contains stabilizers for both camera and mirror plus a mechanism to easily
swap mirrors.

------
matt_wulfeck
> _Using a glass filter triples the area that dew can form prior to liftoff.
> I’ve had shots ruined by dew forming on the front element._

I hate to see the waste still. Use a filter but also build yourself a little
heated wrapper that keeps the camera and it’s lens above the dew point.

~~~
mjhoy
I think the filter you would need for a fisheye like that would be specialized
and somewhat expensive, though, due to the protruding front element. Someone
in the comments said it would pretty much be the cost of the lens.

~~~
patcheudor
Yes, filters that big of any quality would cost more than the $133 fisheye
lens he used and add one more thing that could go wrong. I'd gladly sacrifice
a $1300 lens to capture a rocket launch that close. Mitigating lens damage is
simply something no professional photographer is going to care about in that
situation.

------
chasedehan
Those are some amazing images! Just looked at his personal website and I am
thoroughly impressed.

~~~
bdamm
This is one talented young photographer.

------
wymy
If it pitted the glass lense, wouldn't the solid exhaust penetrate the plastic
bag? I'm surprised there was no other damage.

~~~
tritium
I think it's about force and hardness, contrasted against elastic and
inelastic collisions.

Either that, or maybe the caustic qualities have something to do with it? I'm
not sure of the chemical aspects of the exhaust, but that part is also
mentioned in conjunction with the debris accumulation.

------
signa11
space-station transitioning the moon is also excellent !

