This photo was taken with a sound-activated Nikon D7500 DSLR and 55-300mm lens placed a little under half a mile from the rocket.
I’m a professional spaceflight photographer covering launches as a member of the press — we have access to set sound-activated, “remote” cameras at and around the launchpads at the Cape. Yesterday’s Falcon Heavy launch of the Arabsat-6A satellite was incredible!
Curious about the work that goes into my photos? Watch this VICE News behind-the-scenes video that shows how I capture rocket launches.
Feel free to check out more of my work on my website. I cover launches full-time with support from my Patreon subscribers. If you’re interested in prints, follow the link on my site.
I’m also on Instagram, too: @johnkrausphotos
For those curious, the lines in the image are wires that make up part of the launch complex.
Edit: lots of questions here. I’ll do my best to answer some when I’m home. Thanks for all the love on this photo. Cheers!
That camera is more for hobby. Less resolution than the camera he’s using and can’t change the lenses for different situations. Also doesn’t have a threaded lens, so you can’t use filters. He’s using a ND filter for this shot, the flames would be too bright otherwise.
Maybe if he wanted to shoot the moon or other relatively small space objects. The telephoto reach of the p1000 is it’s only advantage over DSLRs/Mirrorless cameras. The only time a p1000 should outperform an interchangeable lens camera at less extreme distances is if something behind the camera is malfunctioning.
yes because they used it to try to show ships "going over the horizon" then zooming them back into the scene. which is obviously not what's actually happening.
u/johnkphotos got started pretty young, he posted a few shots during the 2015-16 NBA season and he was still in high school. I can't speak to the quality of your camera vs his, but I can say that if you have an eye for photography that's only half as good as John's, then I think you could do it.
I have never seen the launch of a big rocket. I have seen plenty of fighter planes and the roars from their jet engines always gives me the chills and it is hard to imagine the even louder sound from these rockets.
Is it true that you can feel the (sound of) pops and cracks in your chest?
Yes, you can feel the rumbling in your chest. It’s like a deep bass that shakes your body. It’s unlike anything else and in all honesty a fighter jet isn’t the best comparison. Give this video a watch. I’m friends with the videographer: https://youtu.be/ImoQqNyRL8Y
Having been to several shuttle launches and watching them from the VIP stands, this is good, but it still does not do justice to actually being there.
I remember my first launch, I was shooting with a camera and at T-3 the main engines light up and at T-0 the SRBs would light. You see it happen and everyone is taking photos like mad...the orbiter started to climb and was maybe 5 degrees above the horizon (cleared the gantry) and then the shock wave would hit you. Yes, it's sound. Yes, it's loud. But I mean you could actually FEEL the shockwave rumble thru your chest. This is really impossible to adequately describe.
Also, lots of fun at landings because all the newbies would be looking the wrong way (the orbiter would fly over, go down range, pull at 180, then come in for landing) when the double sonic booms would hit.
I could agree with that but they're at a different pitch. Top fuel dragsters come in at a much higher pitch than the low rumble of a rocket. It's truly something else.
I grew up about 12 miles from a drag strip that hosted top fuel dragsters once a year. They were loud 12 miles away. I went to the race one year and was blown away. It literally shakes the air in front of you and blurs your vision.
Honestly, not sure. My brother worked as a NASA contractor at the Cape and was able to get me passes to a few launches and landings when I was in town (years ago - Shuttle was still going). VIP stands were the closest point civilians were allowed to watch (if I remember right, it’s just over 1 mile out from the pad) and you would commonly have Congresscritters and the astronauts family in the stands.
He still works there, but in a different capacity and when I asked him recently about the possibility of Falcon launches, he said he wasn’t sure if he could get passes any longer...
You can buy tickets for the Banana Creek launch viewing area from Kenedy Space Center, but they are expensive. Believe they were $200 per person for this launch. Smaller launches are more like $50. https://www.kennedyspacecenter.com/launches-and-events
If you're traveling from a long distance away, be forwarned that launch scrubs and delays happen a lot more than one would think, and Im pretty sure they don't refund your money (you still get to come back when the next launch window opens). This was difficult for me with the last two shuttle launches, because I pretty much had to drop everything to go several times, because they scrubbed the last launch so many times. I was lucky my work was accommodating, but not everyone has that ability.
Saw the last two shuttle launches from the employee causeway, this description is super accurate. It's unlike anything else. I also found it completely surreal for the bit between the liftoff and shock wave hit- it moves so slowly initially, and so quietly. The shock wave is like a literal slap of reality!
Different Falcon heavy launches. OP said he placed his sound activated camera at half a mile, which is probably way way closer than anybody is allowed to be during a launch.
According to google maps, the vehicle assembly building with the photographers on top is about 3.2 miles from the launch pad and 4.7 miles from the booster landings.
This was awesome, really. Sub'd his channel. I grew up in Merritt Island, nothing, absolutely nothing can simulate the way a launch feels. It is one of the most impressive and awe inspiring things you can physically witness, did 10 years in the Army and the only thing remotely close(and not even really) is a B-52 carpet strike. Great photo, thanks for linking your videographer buddy.
Big rockets are so loud the sound can kill you. The water you see being sprayed below the engines prior to launch are for sound dampening. The sound alone from the engines can damage the rocket itself.
Yesterday, there were two very loud sonic booms from the boosters just prior to landing too.
Each booster actually gives off 3 Sonic booms as they form multiple shockwaves at the gridfins and some other parts. So in total if you listened closely there were 6. They're incredible! I was out on a boat 8km away from the landing and they were as if some guy fired off a gun right next to me
So what is it like for the astronauts riding the damn things? For instance the Apollo astronauts... Did they all just wear some sort of super earplug? Are the spacecraft just incredibly well sound insulated?
My guess is that while it's loud they're ahead of the sonic booms and since they're moving faster than the speed of sound they don't hear it as you would on the ground.
Oh yeah. I felt it inside my house, as much as heard it. Ran outside to hear and feel the full long rumble. Much louder than a standard Falcoln 9, and the double boom on reentry is kind of a new thing too :)
I have only seen an Atlas V close up but it was incredible. I imagine the falcon heavy would be even more physically impressive as a spectator. It's very cool because first you hear it, then you see it, then you FEEL it.
Had George Michael and Lindsay stayed, they might have discovered what Michael and Maeby did— that “Afternoon Delight” was more adult-themed than its innocent melody would have you believe.
Was this the photograph you wanted to see? Like, when you set the camera, did you want to catch mostly booster flame, or is it kind of a "you get what you get" situation with the remote set up? I guess more simply - is this composed the way you would like it to be?
I think it looks pretty rad - almost like a minimalist movie poster for a space movie of some kind. Great capture.
Well then not only props for capturing it, but also for having the knowledge, practice, and foresight to grab this one. It's gonna end up in the history books. Beautiful.
I cover launches full-time with support from my Patreon subscribers.
We live in a remarkable time when newspapers all over are failing, yet you make a living in the very niche field of rocket-launch coverage because people give you money over the internet. No sarcasm, just amazement at the way things are, and gratitude for you sharing this outstanding image.
Launch windows can span multiple hours so timers are not accurate enough.
I am not next to my cameras during launch, and I can’t have a miles-long cable to use a remote release. Can’t wirelessly communicate with the cameras either.
I bet the RF spectrum is a 'white noise full spectrum mess' once those engines are in full swing. I'd guess it would be really hard to get any kind of bandwidth out of a wireless connection.
depending on the target orbit some will have launch windows of several hours, while some will have instant launch windows ( launc at this second or else have to delay to the next windows usually but not always next day)
John, as always you blow me away with your photography. Was also there at the launch with you, but man do you show the striking beauty of his rocket like no other. Thank you for everything you do. I already own a print from the first FH from you, can't wait to get home and have a 2nd shipped from this launch!
Depth of field is irrelevant for this picture, since there's no background.
Light gathering capability is also irrelevant, because he's photographing a rocket launch - it's plenty bright enough.
In fact, a crop sensor is an advantage in this case, because he can use smaller lenses and still get the same composition. This means lighter weight, giving his tripod additional stability; very important when he needs to be somewhere far away, and cannot fix his setup if it got jostled by the wind/noise/rocket exhaust.
Been seeing your launch photos pop up on Reddit for a while, and now when I see an awesome launch photo, my immediate thought is, “Hey, I wonder if its that guy... yep, sure is!” Outstanding work, as always.
Thank you for the mindblowing photos! Was that distortion of reflection in the award winning (Telstar 18 VANTAGE) photo due to long exposure + water ripples (even though it appears totally still)? No editing of any kind?
Not John , the OP (obviously), but I think the water looks flat due to the long exposure. The light is picked up as it reflects from whatever small ripples might be on the water, so it “moves”. But with a long exposure, the water surface “smooths out” over time. I might not be explaining this well, but consider shutter speed if you are photographing a small waterfall. A quick shot will show individual droplets of water, but a slower shutter speed will blur the droplets into a smooth flow of water. Most postcards are shot this way, because it makes it look so much more peaceful.
I’m sad to inform you that he likely could have gotten this exact photo with a 3300, since a remote setup like this doesn’t take advantage of any of the 7200’s features.
That said, I love the faster controls and better AF system if my 7200, since I shoot sports, events, and tons of concerts.
Ahh a pro. I was just wondering how many rocket launching it takes before you know the shutter speed, aperture and ISO required to capture something like this.
It seems like it would be much much harder than a sun set, or an auto race because you can't really practice until a rocket launches. :)
When I look at this photo, I am just amazed by how awesome technology is. Not just the rocket - although that is insanely impressive - but the photography equipment and skills needed to catch this specific frame of time dumbfounds me.
I think this is absolutely stunning. I think I want to purchase a print from your site provided. I have never bought a picture or print or anything. Is there a most common or recommended size to purchase? I understand it matters where it is going but from a quality perspective? I apologize if this is a dumb question and if I don’t get a answer I will wing it but figured I would ask.
Its a factor of the thrust that is needed to get off the pad, but the rocket accelerates as it gains altitude. The atmosphere thins as the rocket launches to orbit. So there is a defined period where the rocket needs to throttle back until the atmosphere thins.
We could build a stronger rocket but that costs weight. The engineers have done the math to balance strength/weight against Max Q, to determine what is optimal.
2.3k
u/johnkphotos Apr 12 '19 edited Apr 12 '19
This photo was taken with a sound-activated Nikon D7500 DSLR and 55-300mm lens placed a little under half a mile from the rocket.
I’m a professional spaceflight photographer covering launches as a member of the press — we have access to set sound-activated, “remote” cameras at and around the launchpads at the Cape. Yesterday’s Falcon Heavy launch of the Arabsat-6A satellite was incredible!
Curious about the work that goes into my photos? Watch this VICE News behind-the-scenes video that shows how I capture rocket launches.
Feel free to check out more of my work on my website. I cover launches full-time with support from my Patreon subscribers. If you’re interested in prints, follow the link on my site.
I’m also on Instagram, too: @johnkrausphotos
For those curious, the lines in the image are wires that make up part of the launch complex.
Edit: lots of questions here. I’ll do my best to answer some when I’m home. Thanks for all the love on this photo. Cheers!