Tonights Waning Gibbous Moon

Tonight offered a very bright Moon that is 88% full, so I drove up to a local peak to see if I could capture it in any detail. Got a couple keepers, and this was the best of the lot:

http://www.pbase.com/dizzygazer/imag...0/original.jpg

1/250s, f/5.6 @ 300.0mm, ISO 1EV under 200

The two craters most visible near the top (at about the 12:30 position) are Hercules and Atlas.

Since the Moon was so bright I thought it would be interesting to see if the camera could capture the North Cascade Mtn's it had just rose over. Tried a few different shots, and found the Moon just did not image well at the extended shutter times, so I had to set the shot up with the Moon just to the right of the frame. This pic was shot at 10:00pm, and the only light source aside from the small lights showing from of the Town of Rockport (pop. @ 110) was the Moon.

http://www.pbase.com/dizzygazer/imag...7033/large.jpg

8s f/7.1 at 70.0mm iso800

There are 3 stars also visible on the upper left, all in a row. From right to left they are Mirach, Almaak and Mirphak. If you were to look directly above Mirphak (about 12º) with binoculars you would see the Double Cluster, and about 8º above Mirach is the Andromeda Galaxy. Both are quite visible in binoculars, and by naked eye in dark skies.

I realize I have a long, long, long ways to go before my images are anywhere close to the quality of the rest of you, but I do hope you'll be patient, and enjoy the ride along with me as I'm having a grand time on the journey..:cool:

Comments/thoughts always appreciated.

Mike

p.s. Had the D90 a full 2 weeks as of today, and it has opened up a whole new world for me. Can't wait to see what tomorrow will bring..http://backup.cambridgeincolour.com/...itzie/beer.gif

Very nice, especially with a 300mm lens. A group of us on this forum has been trying our hand at this type of shot throughout the past few years. There are a few threads related to lunar photography.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dizzy

... as I'm having a grand time on the journey..

---

And please don't ever forget, unless you're trying to make a living out of it, that this is the single most important thing.

So, yes, I'll enjoy riding along with you.

Very good shot of the moon.

On the second one, I think you needed a much longer exposure. It's pretty heavily under-exposed. And there is an awful lot of noise in it. Also, you've got flare coming in at top right, presumably from the moon.

But that looks like a wonderful location. Am thinking star-trails. So, start thinking about the very long exposures (e.g. 1 hour +) from there and you could really be on to something.

Mike, I wish i could have taken such a good pic of the moon after 2 weeks of owning my D90! Well captured, but look at the difference a tiny bit of sharpening in post-production makes...

http://i56.tinypic.com/3505fza.jpg

Hope you don't mind me doing that...

Edit: It's not the best job admittedly, but the sun was in my eyes :p You get the idea anyway :)

Really good detail,Mike and a good shot of the Cascades too.

Good detail on yours too,Tommy. I think post processing plays a big part in photos of the moon- I know many people stack photos-I have no idea how they do that- I can feel a tutorial coming on .

For all you guys into shooting the moon, you'll see I've added on the 'astrophotrography' tag to the thread. If you go into that tag, you'll find other threads of moon images that have been posted up over time.

Thanks for the processing Tommy, it looks great!

I had actually added a bit of sharpening to the pic while in PP, but then removed it as I was concerned about it adding undesired noise, and I liked the smoother texture. Truth is, the Moon's as rough as a cobb, and the texture of the sharpened image likely is much more accurate. Here is another image from the night, and this one did receive some sharpening:

http://www.pbase.com/dizzygazer/imag...2/original.jpg

1/320s, f/5.6 at 300.0mm, ISO 1.0EV under 200

Better? Too noisy?

If the good sky conditions hold I might go back and try a few more tonight. I do know that just as in astronomy, the atmospheric conditions play a huge role in how successful astro-imaging can be. Stable and dry conditions mean better pics, and that is the weather we have here at the moment.

Also want to retry the image of the valley at a longer exposure as suggested by Donald. The pic shown as at 8 sec., so maybe go with 15-20 sec.?

Mike

That's much better Mike :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dizzy

Also want to retry the image of the valley at a longer exposure as suggested by Donald. The pic shown as at 8 sec., so maybe go with 15-20 sec.?

---

Difficult to tell from here what the shutter speed should be! :p Did you shoot in A or M? Personally I'd start by setting the ISO at 200, f/11 (if it is the mountains you want to capture)(If it is the stars you want then I'd go for a larger aperture) in A mode and let the D90 choose the (long) exposure time. If this doesn't give you the exposure you're after then put it into Manual and keep the same settings (ISO 200, f/11) and put it in bulb mode. Hit the shutter release on your remote and time it. Increase or decrease the length of time each time if you want to increase or decrease the exposure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dizzy

Also want to retry the image of the valley at a longer exposure as suggested by Donald. The pic shown as at 8 sec., so maybe go with 15-20 sec.?

---

If you increase the exposure time from 8 to 15-20 seconds you are increasing the exposure by about 1-stop (twice 8 is 16). Double that again (to 32 seconds) and you've gone up 2-stops. And so on. I think, given the exact same lighting conditions, you would need a quite a bit more than one or even 2 stops.

I would have been thinking about an exposure in terms of minutes rather than seconds