geom One trick might be for you to zoom in as close as you can with your camera. The closer the stars appear, the faster they move through the frame. Another thing to check is if you have a ‘manual’ mode on your camera at all–if so, you may have a ‘bulb’ setting in that mode, which means the shutter stays open as long as you hold the button.
Personally, I’m not impressed with star trail shots; to get any decent lengths to them requires at least a 15 minute exposure when using 50mm setting or less. Even then I don’t find them very appealing. Really good star trail pics take at least an hour, and two is better, IMHO. In my area, light pollution spoils these exposure lengths.
FWIW, many people here have been impressed with Registax, which is freeware. My experience with it, however, is that it’s nothing more than a ‘lay an image over another’ program (this is my fault for not having a polar mount on my telescope; used in it’s proper context, it would be fine). But it would accomplish what you’re looking for. Just keep in mind that it’s really slow with very large files, so you might resize things to maybe 800 pixels in width before stacking them.
And yes, they’d be non-farktography shots. But it’s always fun to experiment, so good luck!
p.s., if you can, get a release cable for the shutter–either the old fashioned mechanical plunger style, or if your camera doesn’t accept that, a plug-in electronic version (you may not be able to use either, depending on the point-and-shoot model.)
On the AE-1, it’s worth one roll of film for this type project, if it allows you the lengthier exposure. ISO 200 would be fine for this, and leave that shutter open to your hearts content (at 200 ISO, camera shake from opening the shutter would be negligible in the final production).
.
