Comments on: Moody Moon

By: Matt Falk

Matt Falk — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:56:36 +0000

Wow, all very cool stuff! looks like I’ll have to experiment with HDR myself in the near future. Here’s a few shots of a very pink, then yellow, moonrise from atop Squaw Peak in Phoenix, with the sun having set just behind me. I used a Canon EOS 40D for these shots, and I did have to adjust the contrast and gamma a bit to clear up some of the haze – yes, there was a LOT more originally!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/musematt11/3850941311/sizes/l/in/set-72157622126823098/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/musematt11/3851744942/sizes/l/in/set-72157622126823098/

And with only a small point-and shoot, I took these shots of a setting full moon over the rather lunaresque landscape of White Sands in New Mexico… doubly appropriate since I was there to see the Lunar Lander Challenge at the 2007 X-Prize Cup

http://www.flickr.com/photos/musematt11/2010210509/sizes/l/in/set-72157603155005744/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/musematt11/2011092218/sizes/l/in/set-72157603155005744/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/musematt11/2010284457/sizes/l/in/set-72157603155005744/

By: Charlie Young

Charlie Young — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:51:40 +0000

One thing I also didn’t take into account until I thought about it last week: most modern DSLRs have APS sized sensors or smaller so you get a magnification effect when using the same lenses you used for 35mm photography (typically 1.5 to 1.6x). I have been taking photos with my D700 with a full 35mm frame sensor and am not getting the reach I would like with a 300mm lens. I will try some photos with my D200 to see what comes of it. Thanks for all the pointers.

By: Arran

Arran — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:46:15 +0000

Awesome image, I have never had much luck with imaging the moon.
I have had better results imaging the deep space objects.

By: misstcalia

misstcalia — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:03:53 +0000

Booteefull!! Very nice photograph.
Embiggen.. good word.. I can’t wait for the chance to use it!

By: Chris Setter

Chris Setter — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 19:13:43 +0000

Not HDR, straight RAW from the camera and adjusted in Lightroom taken with a Micro Nikkor 105mm 1/160 sec at f/8.0. All of the settings and Lightroom adjustments are listed under the photo data on flickr.

By: bob

bob — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 14:30:44 +0000

HDR? Cheating a bit. Also HDR is becoming cliched very fast.

By: Nigel Depledge

Nigel Depledge — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 12:01:32 +0000

In case people want to know more about exposure, f-stop etc., most digital photos come with EXIF data that includes this information and sometimes a lot more (although sometimes this is lost in post-processing). All you need to see this information is either a suitable digital-photo-viewing application, or a photo-sharing website such as Flickr (where, unless the photographer has denied access to the EXIF data, you can see it by clicking on the “More properties” link towards the bottom right of the photograph’s main page on Flickr).

Here are a couple of pics I’ve taken of the moon:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22177653@N03/3051149366/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22177653@N03/2495797885/

By: Marcello

Marcello — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 06:56:17 +0000

here are a couple of shots i got this summer

http://echomrg.deviantart.com/art/Carloforte-Moon-133084533
http://echomrg.deviantart.com/art/Carloforte-Moon-Rising-133085235

I especially love the second one, seen the moon rise behind the dark hills every night was wonderful! (i was on vacation on a tiny island, with much less light pollution that i’m used to…)

By: Stephen

Stephen — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 06:01:19 +0000

Here’s all of my shots of the moon. The big shots were taken with the camera coupled to a f/5.6 70mm TeleVue Ranger (I love this little scope!).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wmgobuffs/tags/moon/

By: Martin Lessem, J.D.

Martin Lessem, J.D. — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 03:33:57 +0000

Here is the moon through my Sony Video Camera:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHq_gYXQ4k8

And here is a picture I took while on a cruise in the South Pacific:

http://www2.snapfish.com/viewsharedphoto/p=234241253849516094/l=4532177009/g=40009548/cobrandOid=1000/otsc=SHR/otsi=SPICFB

Enjoy

By: Mully410

Mully410 — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 02:30:43 +0000

This one came in second place in the MyMoon contest by the Lunar and Planetary Institute http://www.lpi.usra.edu/mymoon/ :

More details: http://mully410.blogspot.com/2009/08/lunr-flickr-winners.html

By: Kevin

Kevin — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 00:56:56 +0000

My Moon Set on Flickr –
http://www.flickr.com/photos/26877148@N06/sets/72157615150085926/

(I also have a Phil Plait Set)

By: Some Canadian Skeptic

Some Canadian Skeptic — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 00:41:00 +0000

@Ken B:

Morning civil twilight begins when the geometric center of the sun is 6° below the horizon (the point of civil dawn), and ends at sunrise. Evening civil twilight begins at sunset and ends when the center of the sun reaches 6° below the horizon (the point of civil dusk).

Nautical twilight is defined as the time between when the geometric center of the sun is exactly 6° below the horizon and when the sun’s center is exactly 12° below the horizon.

Astronomical twilight is defined as the time between when the geometric center of the sun is exactly 12° below the horizon and when the sun’s center reaches exactly 18° below the horizon

(from Wiki)

By: Some Canadian Skeptic

Some Canadian Skeptic — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 00:30:30 +0000

http://www.flickr.com/photos/32804459@N06/3819184397/

By: Ken B

Ken B — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:09:03 +0000

I haven’t had much luck getting good photos of the Moon with my inexpensive digital camera, though I have some “decent, considering” type images.

My contribution to IYA 2009 is getting people to look at the night sky. Tonight’s assignment — the ISS is passing overhead (max 82 degrees elevation) at 8:04PM tonight. With “nautical twilight” at 7:48PM, the sky should be pretty dark, and the ISS still in sunlight. (And, unlike two weeks ago, I’m taking my binoculars. And, unlike two days ago, the sky is clear.) Hopefully, some of the kids at my kids’ karate class will be interested.

BTW, what are “civil twilight”, “nautical twilight”, and “astronomical twilight”?

By: Buzz Parsec

Buzz Parsec — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:50:33 +0000

BA said “It’s not hard to get nice shots of the Moon, even during the day”

I disagree! It *is* hard to take really nice pictures of the Moon, mostly because it’s so small. These are terrific!

By: Danno

Danno — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:28:19 +0000

@ 9 Dan I.

Just turn your monitor on it’s side.

By: Totem

Totem — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:21:22 +0000

As Jason said, it's a combination of multiple shots and use of software. I typically use Photomatix. It has good defaults so you don't need massive understanding of the tone mapping to get started, though you can certainly tweak just about anything. The typical way to get the multiple exposures is to use 'bracketing' on your camera. That's where you tell the camera to take 5, 7, or 9 shots in a row, best done from a tripod. Each shot in the series has a different exposure, so as it goes through them, the first shot may be really fast to expose the bright objects. It will get slower with each shot so the last one may be really long to expose the shadows. (The exposures may not be in that order, but you get the idea). Here is an HDR shot we took a while back...sorry, it's not of the moon! It used 9 bracketed exposures. With a typical single shot, the sun would be way overexposed, or the building and sky way underexposed.

By: Keith (the first one)

Keith (the first one) — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:09:42 +0000

That’s very nice. I like seeing the moon during the day. Makes it seem more welcoming for some reason.

By: hale_bopp

hale_bopp — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:03:00 +0000

I got a couple of the crescent Moon Tuesday night you can see at http://halfastro.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/quick-crescent-moon-pics/

From last Friday night, I got the Milky Way over the 2.3 meter dome at Kitt Peak and a shot of Tucson from Kitt peak you can see at http://halfastro.wordpress.com/2009/09/19/a-night-kitt-peak/

I need to brush up on how to embed images here!

By: !AstralProjectile

!AstralProjectile — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:02:02 +0000

From the first google hit.
Hmm. Interesting, but not suprising- you lose 4 bits:

Image sensors in high quality digital cameras have a bit depth of at least 12; they have 212 = 4096 discrete tonal levels. Standard 24-bit color files have a bit depth of only 8; they have only 28 = 256 discrete tonal levels. Tonal levels are lost in the conversion.

By: minusRusty

minusRusty — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:01:22 +0000

Hmmm. It’s easier to see the man in the moon on the small shot than the larger one.

BTW, Phil, do you ever check your mail??!?

-Rusty

By: LouisS

LouisS — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:49:52 +0000

Kudos to your Bro-in-law for taking an exceptional picture. Great color sky and clouds too! Here’s a photo of a waxing crescent between clouds that I snapped on 9/21. http://img27.yfrog.com/img27/1950/h52h.jpg

By: Daniel

Daniel — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:46:40 +0000

Here's my entry, taken with a small telescope.

By: Jason A.

Jason A. — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:42:07 +0000

HDR is both an exposure and software technique. You need multiple exposures so that everything is exposed properly at least once, then the software (photoshop can do it but there are other programs that are better) basically compares relative brightness among all the objects in all the exposures and maps it into a single (32 bit) image. Then you have to tone map it down to 8 bit to get something that can display on a monitor. Essentially you’ve mapped a total brightness range that stretched over multiple images down to 1 image. You end up with an image that looks more like the way your brain sees it rather than the way the camera sees it. The key is to be pretty conservative with your tone map settings if you want a final image that doesn’t look computer generated or just overprocessed.

There’s a way to do it with a single RAW exposure but I’ve never tried that.