I see the moon, and the moon sees me...

[ladybugamanda]

Getting a good shot
Can be very Tricky!

LOL How'd I do? This is SOOC and just compressed for posting here. I really played with settings and this is the shot that I think I like the best. AND - I did everything totally MANUEL! *takes a bow* Setting were 5.6, 1/60, 100 ISO

[realworld]

//applause//

[ladybugamanda]

Thank you!!! Next I want to capture it rising while it's light enough out to get the mountains in the shot also. This was taken right above the mountain - yet if I was able to get the mountian then the detail in the moon was shot to heck.

[Greg McCary]

Very nice LBA. I have tried this before and just can't seem to nail it like this. What about a moon rising over some trees, or one coming thru some clouds.....

[ladybugamanda]

Those are good ideas. My husband kept saying that if we could only get a bat to fly in front of the moon... They were flying everywhere BUT there. I'll keep working on it. I have to take my dog to 'puppy school' tonight and I'll try to remember to pack the camera and tripod for a different view/shot of the moon.

[Dylan8i]

in order to get the moon rising with enough foreground in focus and enough light to see the forground requires the moon rising before the sun is actually set. which can be hard to figure out as the moon rises almost an hour apart between days.

when i was trying to shoot full moons at delicate arch, i was using a table and didn't realize they didn't adjust for daylight savings time and what not, so i had to sit an hour in the dark.


this looks good though, keep trying to get your shot. but i don't know if a bat would even show up against a moon this bright, it might though.

[ladybugamanda]

Thanks, Dylan! The bat is my husband's idea...not important to me. I was thrilled, to say the least, that I got the detail of the moon. The first time I tried (I can admit it now) I used too long of an exposure. I'll keep working at it and share the results.

[payn817]

It should show. Here's a "rising" moon shot at around 6pm with a flock of birds flying in front. Not trying to hijack the thread, just giving an example. The exif should be attached. Not sure you could get the bat and moon sharp though.

[WsW-WYATT-EARP]

moon shots are sweet !!!

i tried last night and got a reflection:cryin: that from the uv filter ? I am hoping to try again tonight and take the filter off ...

GREAT PICS !!! both of ya !!! :thumbsup:

[ladybugamanda]

Payn - cool shot! It made me realize if I crop mine - the moon will look bigger maybe! LOL
Wyatt - good luck tonight. I had a reflection my first time, but I think because I had too long of exposure and it was SO bright. I'll look for your results!

[WsW-WYATT-EARP]

well not to hijack your thread either ...

this is what i ended up with .... could of gotten better I think had I gone to a different place .. but time restrictions held me where I was. Can't wait for the bigger moon out here, still a ways away.

I am much happier with what I got this time though ..

Settings were all manual -
1/80
f/8
ISO - 200

[payn817]

Yeah, it'll make the moon look larger. This was not cropped a great deal, it was taken at 400mm, and with a 1.4 tc., so like 600mm.

Try f/11 at shutter=iso. If it's not fast enough, drop one f stop and go up one stop shutter. If you're blowing it, keep playing with it. This was posted by someone before (can't remember who), and it usually works well for me.

[ladybugamanda]

I took several shots last night at different settings. The only thing I didn't adjust was the ISO. I'll go see what else I have.

[WsW-WYATT-EARP]

when trying to shoot the moon the first night and bad results i did some searching the next day and found this site ... nice read for shooting the moon ... (sounds like i am playing hearts now )

http://home.hiwaay.net/~krcool/Astro/moon/howtophoto/

:thumbsup:

[J-Dogg Productions]

nice moons lol good shots like the detailed surfacees

[drg]

I'm glad you and Manuel did so well!

The 'sunny 16' rule can be applied to photographing the moon. After all, it is reflected sunlight. Depending upon digital or film you will still want to bracket your exposures and overide in the + direction. That is the best way to get a white moon. Otherwise it's like shooting snow, it will be some other color, gray orange or other yuck. In other words, it is very easy to underexpose the moon.

A tripod is a must! After all this is a 'slow moving' target.

Two links to moon photo's I've made and are posted in the gallery:

Waxing moon

Full Moon

[ladybugamanda]

Nice moons yourself, drg! Aaaack! What's the "sunny 16" rule? There is SO much to learn and my brain is so small!

[drg]

Nice moons yourself, drg! Aaaack! What's the "sunny 16" rule? There is SO much to learn and my brain is so small!

An old guideline (better word than rule) says on a bright sunny day you can set your exposure at f/16 and the shutter speed at the ISO rating of the film. If your camera does not have an exact match to the ISO (such as 400 which not all cameras support), you would use the next higher shutter speed such as 1/500th. So f/16 at 1/500th on a bright sunny day with 400 ISO film.

There are problems with this with scenes that have a wide range from light to dark where you might wish to capture details. Slide film usually has to be biased to increase the exposure with this guideline so the result is not too dark or underexposed.

Photographing a very bright subject against a dark background often will result in overexposure so you may have to go the other way. Normally you would start with 1/100th of a second and f/16 for ISO 100. For Example to prevent overexposure: with 100 ISO film you could probably start at f/16 and 1/250th if the moon filled most of your viewfinder. Now is where this gets more technical, the moon doesn't have the 'intensity'(not the best technical term) of daylight so you may need to bias or 'override' this setting to something like f/8 at 1/250th.

All of this of course is for a full moon, low humidity, little or no dust, and fairly cool temperature so that heat in the atmosphere is not causing as much distortion. This is also for film! ISO numbers on digital cameras will vary somewhat (easily as much a half a 'step'). Then the camera's histogram becomes your best friend. That though is another discussion.

That's why I like to call it a 'guideline' though traditionally it is a called a rule. This gets you in the ballpark Hope this helps.

Oh, and Thanks for the comment on my moons!

[ladybugamanda]

Great explanation! I'm not sure I'm ready to figure out histograms! They sound confusing!