Moonshot question: I took this moonset yesterday AM just as dawn was breaking. I am pleased with the shot, but wish the moon was not so blown out. I am assuming this is the result of...

cogerox Loc: Northern Cal

I took this moonset yesterday AM just as dawn was breaking. I am pleased with the shot, but wish the moon was not so blown out. I am assuming this is the result of shooting at a long exposure of 20 secs. I am wondering if I had shot at iso 800 instead of 100, thereby reducing the exposure to 2.5 secs, if the moon would have been clearer. Any and all responses welcome.

Nikon D300
Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II@ 38mm
Cokin split ND filter
Tripod
f8
20secs
ISO 100

PP in LR5 with Nik plugins

Moonset over Sutter Buttes

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

[quote=cogerox]You have a great discussion here. The moon is the same brightness as the earth at noon. The mountains are well exposed as you have them. To do this best requires a couple of experiments. One is HDR which brightens the darkness and darkens the brightness. The other trick is two pictures exposed correctly and copy and past the moon to the landscape. I like to do this because I make the moon bigger. Your problem is that reflections are a bit hard to get right. Your camera data is posted. Thanks David PS for the landscape alone I would have increase the ISO to about 800 so the time could be cut shorter.

cogerox Loc: Northern Cal

[quote=Meives]

cogerox wrote:

You have a great discussion here. The moon is the... (show quote)

Thanks Meives for the thoughtful response. On landscapes I usually do take 3 to 5 exposures just in case I want to do an HDR in pp. However, I just barely had time to get my camera set up before the moon set and didn't think I could get five exposures at such long exposure times. Next time I'll get there earlier and do better planning.

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

[quote=Meives]

cogerox wrote:

You have a great discussion here. The moon is the... (show quote)

Merely adjusting the ISO to shorten shutter duration will not address the dynamic range issue, i.e. the blown highlights of the moon to gain correct exposure of the landscape.....

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

LoneRangeFinder wrote:

Merely adjusting the ISO to shorten shutter duration will not address the dynamic range issue, i.e. the blown highlights of the moon to gain correct exposure of the landscape.....

I agree, but it would make the total time less. Us "Old School" people are afraid to bump up the ISO. 1600 is reasonable. The new Canon goes to 128,000. I didn't complement the landscape. It was a wonderful composition. Great discussion. David
http://photoephemeris.com/

The Photographers Ephemeris is a wonderful app that shows sunrise, sunset, moon rise moon set and the compass degree of each. Check it out.

cogerox Loc: Northern Cal

Meives wrote:

I agree, but it would make the total time less. Us "Old School" people are afraid to bump up the ISO. 1600 is reasonable. The new Canon goes to 128,000. I didn't complement the landscape. It was a wonderful composition. Great discussion. David
http://photoephemeris.com/

The Photographers Ephemeris is a wonderful app that shows sunrise, sunset, moon rise moon set and the compass degree of each. Check it out.

So if I understand you, David, the only way to correctly expose for this image would be two exposures which would be combined as layers in PS. Is that correct?

Thanks for the link. It looks like a great site.
Roger

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

cogerox wrote:

So if I understand you, David, the only way to correctly expose for this image would be two exposures which would be combined as layers in PS. Is that correct?

Thanks for the link. It looks like a great site.
Roger

Two ways I know of. HDR would do it. Copy and paste will do it also. But you would have to copy and paste moon and the reflection. I will post a fun one I did. It was not intended to look real. Fun only. David

jeanbug35 Loc: Jonesboro AR

Love this shot.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

cogerox wrote:

I took this moonset yesterday AM just as dawn was ... (show quote)

Also remember the moon is moving and you will get blurring with long exposure

wpbJoe Loc: West Palm Beach, Fl

some of the best shots I ever got of the moon were in early morning.....I think because of less contrast. Post editing necessary including to darken sky to a night time look.

pauleveritt Loc: Erie, Colorado

Also keep in mind that telescopes use clock drive to synchronize the movement with the camera. The moon is blurry because it was MOVING the entire 20 seconds. Anything beyond 2 seconds will give noticeable motion blur in astrophotography.

cogerox Loc: Northern Cal

jeanbug35 wrote:

Love this shot.

Thanks jeanbug35. Glad you enjoyed it.

cogerox Loc: Northern Cal

pauleveritt wrote:

Also keep in mind that telescopes use clock drive to synchronize the movement with the camera. The moon is blurry because it was MOVING the entire 20 seconds. Anything beyond 2 seconds will give noticeable motion blur in astrophotography.

Right. Which brings me back to my original question - should I have shot this at ISO800 in order to reduce shutter speed to 2.5 secs. I guess that would resolve the motion issue, but not necessarily the blown out moon issue, so two shots are still required to get the shot i want.

melvin short Loc: Seattle, Wa

wow, I used to play in the buttes, we lived in Yuba city, and sutter, have a lot of fun memories there, and the catfish and frogging was most excellent in butte creek, that pic brings back a lot of memories

cogerox Loc: Northern Cal

melvin short wrote:

wow, I used to play in the buttes, we lived in Yuba city, and sutter, have a lot of fun memories there, and the catfish and frogging was most excellent in butte creek, that pic brings back a lot of memories

Mevin, I'm glad I could bring that all back for you. Thanks for looking.