Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Check out Street Photography section of our forum.
Photo Gallery
Interesting colors show up in Blood Moon
Page 1 of 2 next>
Jan 21, 2019 17:08:00   #
Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan
 
Interesting colors showed up in my Blood Moon in post processing when I just clicked on Auto in raw. I had to subdue some of the resulting cyans and blues because it looked too fake.

These weren't enlarged. They're were shot at 1000mm equivalent focal length. Exposures varied but the peak blood color was f8, 1/2 sec., ISO 1250.

I had the most difficulty because of shooting almost straight up from my location. I wasn't totally equipped for that.

Also, the moon was so dark I almost couldn't see it with my naked eye and there was not a lot of dynamic range to show good detail. And it was 0º Farenheight.



Reply
Jan 21, 2019 17:10:12   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
I like it! Unfortunately, Eastern Oregon was covered in clouds so no blood moon for us.

Reply
Jan 21, 2019 17:13:12   #
ialvarez50
 
Why is it that some people use such high ISO? I ne er go past 400 ISO because I don't want any digital noise in my images. I much preferred to use longer exposure time than higher ISO.

Reply
 
 
Jan 21, 2019 17:22:13   #
saxman71 Loc: Wenatchee, WA
 
These are quite nice.

Reply
Jan 21, 2019 17:31:54   #
Bigmike1 Loc: I am from Gaffney, S.C. but live in Utah.
 
Nice shots. It wasn't nearly that cold here in Utah but I didn't make the effort to go outside to see it; much less shoot it.

Reply
Jan 21, 2019 19:02:21   #
Selene03
 
great shots!!!

Reply
Jan 21, 2019 19:18:51   #
Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan
 
I didn't want to go slower than a 1/2 second. I think the moon is fully eclipsed at this time. It's really very dark. Not the looney 11 rule exposure by far.
ialvarez50 wrote:
Why is it that some people use such high ISO? I ne er go past 400 ISO because I don't want any digital noise in my images. I much preferred to use longer exposure time than higher ISO.

Reply
Check out Digital Artistry section of our forum.
Jan 21, 2019 22:32:21   #
ialvarez50
 
Well, you forget that when you photograph the moon, the rock is so far away that you do not need an f/8. I routinely photography the moon using 200 ISO with the lens fully open. The depth of field in my photos of the moon is fine because the distance is so far away. This image that I am including was from the super moon on 2015, at the darkest point I shot the moon using 200 ISO, f/4.0 at 2 seconds.
Look, if you are interested to try, using these settings next time.

ISO 100
f/16 at 1/125 of a second. You know that this gives you the correct exposure of the moon, right?
So will this.
f/11 at 1/250
f/8 at 1/500
f/5.6 at 1/1000
f/4.0 at 1/2000
f/2.8 at 1/4000
Yes! You can take pictures of the moon without a tripod, with the camera in your hand at 1/4000 of a second shutter speed. This is called “reciprocal exposures”. And I routinely teach this to my students at Truman College in Chicago. I never accept their excuses because until they try it, they cannot tell me that it does not work. I know that many people barely know their camera, much less photography. My students come to my classes because I like to teach them properly, I do not just tell them to do something because I say so. I have been doing this for almost 40 years and there is nothing technical about photography that I do not know and have done myself. That includes anything with a film camera.

I hope you do not take this the wrong way, some people in this group are "very sensitive".

Cheers



Reply
Jan 21, 2019 22:58:49   #
Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan
 
Nice composite. Maybe I should hype my colors as well. My lens was wide open. It's effective focal length was 1000mm wide open at f8.

I'm not quite agreeing with you if you're saying use the Luney 11 rule for the Blood moon. During the blood moon phase it's in total eclipse and it's red. Requires a lot more exposure than the settings you gave. Plus, I would never use 2 seconds for a moon exposure, as you suggested if I wanted it sharp. We're not talking a normal white moon shot here so I guess I don't get it.
ialvarez50 wrote:
Well, you forget that when you photograph the moon, the rock is so far away that you do not need an f/8. I routinely photography the moon using 200 ISO with the lens fully open. The depth of field in my photos of the moon is fine because the distance is so far away. This image that I am including was from the super moon on 2015, at the darkest point I shot the moon using 200 ISO, f/4.0 at 2 seconds.
Look, if you are interested to try, using these settings next time.

ISO 100
f/16 at 1/125 of a second. You know that this gives you the correct exposure of the moon, right?
So will this.
f/11 at 1/250
f/8 at 1/500
f/5.6 at 1/1000
f/4.0 at 1/2000
f/2.8 at 1/4000
Yes! You can take pictures of the moon without a tripod, with the camera in your hand at 1/4000 of a second shutter speed. This is called “reciprocal exposures”. And I routinely teach this to my students at Truman College in Chicago. I never accept their excuses because until they try it, they cannot tell me that it does not work. I know that many people barely know their camera, much less photography. My students come to my classes because I like to teach them properly, I do not just tell them to do something because I say so. I have been doing this for almost 40 years and there is nothing technical about photography that I do not know and have done myself. That includes anything with a film camera.

I hope you do not take this the wrong way, some people in this group are "very sensitive".

Cheers
Well, you forget that when you photograph the moon... (show quote)

Reply
Jan 21, 2019 23:24:29   #
LarryFB Loc: Depends where our RV is parked
 
Fotoartist wrote:
I didn't want to go slower than a 1/2 second. I think the moon is fully eclipsed at this time. It's really very dark. Not the looney 11 rule exposure by far.


The Looney 11 rule does not apply when the moon is in the shadow of the earth. There is much less light at that time when there is with a full moon!

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 01:09:26   #
ialvarez50
 
No, I did not say that you have to use the rule to photograph the moon during an eclipse, this is why I end up with 2 seconds exposure at the darkest moments of the moon. I do use professional lenses and the one I use to photograph the moon is very sharp, even fully open. Give it shot, you have nothing to lose, 2 seconds is nothing when you photograph something so far away.

Reply
Check out Film Photography section of our forum.
Jan 22, 2019 09:28:29   #
alberio Loc: Casa Grande AZ
 
ialvarez50 wrote:
No, I did not say that you have to use the rule to photograph the moon during an eclipse, this is why I end up with 2 seconds exposure at the darkest moments of the moon. I do use professional lenses and the one I use to photograph the moon is very sharp, even fully open. Give it shot, you have nothing to lose, 2 seconds is nothing when you photograph something so far away.


What was your focal length? The other gentleman was using 1000mm. I would be very surprised if you can get a clean shot at 2 seconds without a tracking drive at that focal length.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 09:29:52   #
alberio Loc: Casa Grande AZ
 
Fotoartist wrote:
Interesting colors showed up in my Blood Moon in post processing when I just clicked on Auto in raw. I had to subdue some of the resulting cyans and blues because it looked too fake.

These weren't enlarged. They're were shot at 1000mm equivalent focal length. Exposures varied but the peak blood color was f8, 1/2 sec., ISO 1250.

I had the most difficulty because of shooting almost straight up from my location. I wasn't totally equipped for that.

Also, the moon was so dark I almost couldn't see it with my naked eye and there was not a lot of dynamic range to show good detail. And it was 0º Farenheight.
Interesting colors showed up in my Blood Moon in p... (show quote)

These are very well done, as good as I've seen.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 09:45:36   #
Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida
 
You still got 3 nice images despite the conditions.......nice work sir.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 10:19:52   #
MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI
 
ialvarez50 wrote:
No, I did not say that you have to use the rule to photograph the moon during an eclipse, this is why I end up with 2 seconds exposure at the darkest moments of the moon. I do use professional lenses and the one I use to photograph the moon is very sharp, even fully open. Give it shot, you have nothing to lose, 2 seconds is nothing when you photograph something so far away.


...2 seconds is nothing when you photograph something so far away...

Two seconds can be a very long time with a 1000mm lens and a dark moon! There will be a lot of motion blur unless you have an Astro Tracker (with a lunar mode preferably). Try a 2 second image of the night sky and see how long the star trails are. The stars (and moon) are moving relative to us because of the Earth's rotation.

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Traditional Street and Architectural Photography section of our forum.
Photo Gallery
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.