Yes-"only 3 seconds."
There is a bit of a longer back story to this very short 3 second video. I was staying at what my wife and I consider, one of the best hotels we have ever stayed at. All of the activities were extremely expensive. They wanedt to charge me the equivalent of $433.00 USD for a guide to drive me away from the hotel and lights into the deeper desert, and to stay with me for the shoot which I estimated to be about 4 hours. I just plain refused to spend the $ and tried to do it on the cheap.
I took one of the hotel golf cart rides to the edge of the darkest part of the resort near a restaurant set up in the sand. The restaurant had large spot lights illuminating the palms. I tired to climb up the dune, and with my 84 year old legs, it was not easy. One step up and two steps slide back. Repeat. Repeat. After about 30 minutes of struggling, I found a place behind a dune shielding me from the lights. I set up the tripod, found a bright star to focus on, and then did about 20 test shots for ISO, level horizon, shutter speed,etc. (it was pitch black and I had on my head lamp.
At long last, I started the sequence. I settled on a 15 second interval to avoid star trailing, and a 10 second exposure at ISO 1250 to avoid noise So doing the calculations, I was able to shoot an image every 15+10 second, or 25 seconds per shot, which gave me about 2 images a minute. Knowing the I needed 24 frames (images) per second of video, I managed to stay from 7:00 PM to 8:00 PM. We had a dinner reservation for our last night there at 8:30! Of course we did not make it to the restaurant until 9 PM and all I could get was 100 frames. Ergo, the 3 second timelapse. I was willing to cancel the dinner, but about 2/3rds of the way through the shot a a SANDSTORM arose! Sheets of fine sand started to blow into my camera, eyes, camera bag, etc. So I had to break down everything, and struggle back down the very soft dune (my shoes sank into the sand up to the ankles).