You will probably want at least 1/250 sec shutter speed because the moon moves very quickly at the horizon. If there is nothing closer than the horizon line that you want to be in sharp focus, then a wider aperture such as f/5.6 should work well.

The exact settings will depend on several factors, including whether there is still light in the sky. For example, in Yakima moonrise on the 13th is at 7:30 pm, and on the 14th a bit after 8 pm. Sunset is 7:25. Exposure will also vary depending on the air quality: does the moon look orange or bright white?

If you shoot in raw and know your camera's capabilities well, you'll be able to adjust ISO accordingly (how much noise can it - or you - live with, and how far over- or under-exposed can you edit later for details). Use exposure bracketing and a tripod.

I well remember my first moon rise photo outing. It was a lot of fun capturing that first glimpse of orange at the horizon!

First thanks for ideas The shots are staged speed about 40 MPH I will be about 100' with a tripod and free hand. I use a Nikon D3400 I use both a 50 mm and a 300 mm lens (by the way I'm old school so terms I use terms that reflect that, but I do understand something have changed, but film speed, aperture as well as shutter speed are still what we work with) I'm 76 and I think I use to know at least the range to be in, not any more. I'm practicing panning using cars (not as good as I once was)
Thanks and if you have other ideas please share

Only one other member suggested this: a panorama. You can easily do a two or three shot horizontal or vertical series and stitch them together in camera or use Lightroom or darkroom. Really doesn't matter the lens you use - it's the composition that comes first and foremost.

Hope you don't mind, but here is my first panorama as an example, taken last year in September 2018 at Rollins Campground in the northern part of Adirondack State Park, NY., USA. This is a horizontal panorama composed of 4 photos stitched together using Lightroom. Camera: my bought-used Nikon 1 J2 with standard 10-30 mm lens, ISO 100, shot at f/5 1/30 second, on a tripod.

I made the first set of test exposures as I described in another thread (the one on ISO). I shot using raw+JPG.

I wanted to test how much difference the F-Stop vs T-Stop would make and I wanted to see how the ISO standard that's based on JPG results affects raw images.

I used my monitor, turned all the way up, white target, my Sony a6500 and two different lenses. I used my Sigma 30/2.8 and my Sony FE70200/4. For the zoom, I used both 70 and 200 so there are, in effect, 3 lenses tested. I also tested for maximum possible exposure. I also measured the monitor's brightness with the "645 Pro" app on my iPhone 6s.

With one exception, I abandoned the use of RawDigger because it can't read JPG. I found ways to use FastRawViewer to get most of what I wanted. I have attached a spreadsheet for the curious but here's the bottom line. The pictures here are screenshots of FRV for the JPG versions. They only show the green channel because that is always the highest on this camera so it's the first to max-out.

If ISO is based on the JPG result then for this camera and the FE70200 lens with the 1/3 stop meter correction, the indicated ISO 100 is correct. But for the Sigma 30/2.8 the result is a slight overexposure of about 1/3 stop. This is consistent with the DXO reviews for the two lenses which gave T-Stops.

The true ISO cannot be separated from the system which includes the lens and its transmission efficiency.

The ISO produces a different result for the raw file. For raw, the ISO cannot be determined without an assumption regarding the reflection percentage for which the meter is set. This is in addition to the issue of lens transmission.

Example: if the metered portion of the image leaves exactly 3 stops from there to the maximum possible density then the meter is assuming 12.5%. But if the difference is greater then the assumption is lower OR the ISO is not what we think it is OR both. It’s not possible to know without instrumented testing and that would be pointless for just using the camera.

The OP wrote, "So my question is what, if any software can eliminate the distractions in the background (windshield area and across)...I would like to be able to edit out the distractions..."

The OP is inexperienced in post-processing. The replies have answered the original questions with demonstrations and information relating to the complexity of the task, as well as with suggestions for future (e.g. depth of field). Relatively speaking, this has been a most excellent topic

This is a photo I took at the Concours of America in July. Taken with a Nikon D4300 using the 18-55mm kit zoom lens. Shot at ISO 100, 55mm, f5.6 and 1/250. It's a one off 1946 Fiat 1100C Spider by Carrozzeria Frua. So my question is what, if any software can eliminate the distractions in the background (windshield area and across. I know I can crop the left side to remove the taillight. As many of you know, cars shows can be a challenge in many ways and I'm still learning to use manual mode. I thought this was one of my better photos (composition wise) and would like to be able to edit out the distractions. I notice a lot of you use products such as Lightroom and wonder if any of these can be used for scenarios like this. I have iMac's Photos and Nikon software, but have not gotten far with that. Just don't want to buy something and find it doesn't do more that what I already have. I don't need to break the bank either. This is a hobby, said most of us after our last equipment purchase. LOL Feel free to critique the photo as well. It's how I will learn.