# friendly reminder!!! Supermoon tomorrow!!!



## duydaniel (Jun 22, 2013)

Supermoon on: June 22-23
This picture taken today


----------



## Click (Jun 22, 2013)

Nicely done. 8)


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 22, 2013)

agreed, that is a nice shot. usually my moon photos don't show stars.


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (Jun 22, 2013)

Dang, I just went outside and there is so much cloud cover here in Tulsa that the moon is doing nothing more than playing a mean game of peek-a-boo. Kudos on your shot though, well done! Now I have another item on my list of "must have shots" for tomorrow's wedding. lol

Cheers,
-Tabor


----------



## PhotographAdventure (Jun 22, 2013)

So does the moon have an atmosphere of any type? Interesting to see blackness surrounding the moon and no stars.


----------



## duydaniel (Jun 22, 2013)

You may be surprised knowing the lens I used for this shot.
It is a cheap Nikon 55-300 without filter handheld on D5100


----------



## duydaniel (Jun 22, 2013)

PhotographAdventure said:


> So does the moon have an atmosphere of any type? Interesting to see blackness surrounding the moon and no stars.



The moon doesn't have atmosphere I believe. But you won't see stars near the moon due to the amount of light the moon emits > stars light.


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 22, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> PhotographAdventure said:
> 
> 
> > So does the moon have an atmosphere of any type? Interesting to see blackness surrounding the moon and no stars.
> ...



Would a reflection count as emitting... I don't know... but I do 100% agree with your assessment. It is like light pollution on earth... it diminishes the ability to see the visible light of the stars.


----------



## duydaniel (Jun 23, 2013)

6-22-2013


----------



## hniekus (Jun 23, 2013)

Lots of rain here in the Netherlands, but in the evening suddenly a clear sky for a short time.


----------



## strykapose (Jun 27, 2013)

A friend called and wanted to shoot the Supermoon. I was hesitant to go but gave in. I grabbed what was avail; 5D2 & 70-200 Mk I, which I use for lightning shots since I'm not too concerned if they get wet. So, the moon pops out for a few minutes, then comes a light drizzle causing all of the other togs to scatter. Then it ducks under a cloud. 
So here is my shot, It got "Explored". 
I wish I'd grabbed the 5D3 & 70-200 Mk II, as my friend had his D800E & 70-200.
But there goes the saying:
"The Best Camera You Have is the One with You"
To me, its a little soft, but I got the shot. 



2013 Supermoon Eclipse from NYC [Explored] by Strykapose, on Flickr


----------



## Click (Jun 27, 2013)

strykapose said:


> "The Best Camera You Have is the One with You"
> To me, its a little soft, but I got the shot.



Nicely done strykapose. I like your shot.


----------



## duydaniel (Jun 27, 2013)

Wow... I wish I were over there... excellent shot!!!


----------



## strykapose (Jun 27, 2013)

Click said:


> strykapose said:
> 
> 
> > "The Best Camera You Have is the One with You"
> ...



Thank You Very Much Click


----------



## strykapose (Jun 27, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> Wow... I wish I were over there... excellent shot!!!



Thanks, You have a nice shot also. 
Looks like you had clear skies to get that shot. 
I did forget to mention it was cloudy here, with no lightning on the radar.
Which was why I was hesitant on going. A few hours before sunset/moonrise, the skies opened up. 
About 10 minutes after moonrise, it ducked behind the clouds.


----------



## hamada (Jun 27, 2013)

looked like every other moon.

typical internet hype.


interesting fact for astronomers.. but doesn´t help a bit to make better images of the moon.


----------



## AG (Jun 27, 2013)

A quick pic taken handheld, using a 60D and an old 55-250 Kit lens i had access too at the time.





Not the greatest shot but it was a spur of the moment thing.


----------



## emag (Jun 27, 2013)

Not a 'supermoon'....but a 5 second shot of the ISS passing almost directly between my location and Saturn. Had I been up the road a mile in mosquito country, it would have done just that, but Saturn would not have shown on the shot.

As an aside, I'm an amateur astronomer/astrophotographer and like many of my compadres, I don't care for the term 'supermoon'. Visually, it looks like every other full moon you'll ever see (except an eclipse).


----------



## duydaniel (Jun 27, 2013)

It was pretty tricky to balance between bright moon and dark foreground


----------



## duydaniel (Jun 27, 2013)

AG said:


> A quick pic taken handheld, using a 60D and an old 55-250 Kit lens i had access too at the time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think this is incredible for the 250mm shot... Thanks to the high res of 60D


----------



## CTJohn (Jun 27, 2013)

Unfortunately a little hazy here in Connecticut.


----------



## mwh1964 (Jun 27, 2013)

strykapose said:


> A friend called and wanted to shoot the Supermoon. I was hesitant to go but gave in. I grabbed what was avail; 5D2 & 70-200 Mk I, which I use for lightning shots since I'm not too concerned if they get wet. So, the moon pops out for a few minutes, then comes a light drizzle causing all of the other togs to scatter. Then it ducks under a cloud.
> So here is my shot, It got "Explored".
> I wish I'd grabbed the 5D3 & 70-200 Mk II, as my friend had his D800E & 70-200.
> But there goes the saying:
> ...



Nice shot. What was the shooting location if I might ask. West of Javits Center?


----------



## 20Dave (Jun 27, 2013)

hamada said:


> looked like every other moon.
> 
> typical internet hype.
> 
> ...



Correct, I have been an amateur astronomer for nearly 20 years, and I didn't even go outside to look because I knew that it wasn't particularly visually interesting. Having said that, I must say that the photo next to the Empire State Building by strykapose is incredible.

A couple of other quick tidbits about imaging the moon:


The most interesting photos of the moon occur at phases other than the full moon (unless you create a stunning scene like the photo of the moon next to the Empire State Building). That is because when there is a partial moon, the sun hits the craters at angles rather than straight on, so the resulting shadows highlight the craters. With a full moon, the sunlight is almost at the same angle as our visual angle, so there aren't many shadows to highlight. Because of that, I am guessing that the first photo in this thread is a mosaic or blending of a couple of photos taken over a couple of days (which perhaps the OP stated). Otherwise, I don't see how you would be able to see shadows in the craters on both sides of the moon so clearly.
Serious lunar imagers actually use webcams rather than DSLRs so that they can get a large number of frames (sometimes hundreds) and merge the best images together with stacking/processing programs. I would love to attempt this but haven't yet.
If you do use a DSLR, it takes a fair amount of practice to get the exposure right, because the moon is so bright compared to the dark sky background. HDR can be helpful, but even then it is often best to catch the moon when it is low in the sky and not as bright as when it gets above the atmosphere haze. 
If you try to get more magnified images, having steady skies is critical. I suffer from a lot of shimmer where I live, so I can never get crisp images at high magnification. A lack of skill and experience doesn't help either : 
Here is a mosaic (http://bartolini.zenfolio.com/img/s8/v85/p1661868389-6.jpg) that I attempted a few years ago with a 20D and a telescope as a lens. It could really use some photoshop help to get rid of the blocky sky background, but I didn't bother. If you want to see a serious mosaic from someone who really knows what they are doing, check this out: http://www.astronomie.be/bart.declercq/Moon_20100323.jpg

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## AG (Jun 27, 2013)

I would normally just tell people to just use this handy Moon Exposure calculator.

http://www.adidap.com/2006/12/06/moon-exposure-calculator/

Does the trick and is pretty accurate, after some practice you get to learn what works and what doesn't and so wont use it as much but its good for starting out.


----------



## duydaniel (Jun 27, 2013)

AG said:


> I would normally just tell people to just use this handy Moon Exposure calculator.
> 
> http://www.adidap.com/2006/12/06/moon-exposure-calculator/
> 
> Does the trick and is pretty accurate, after some practice you get to learn what works and what doesn't and so wont use it as much but its good for starting out.



Nice one.
I used spot metering on the moon. Then work from there.


----------



## drjlo (Jun 27, 2013)

What I could manage with 70-200 and 2x TC..




SuperMoonEF2 by drjlo1, on Flickr


----------



## serendipidy (Jun 27, 2013)

My attempt with a 7D, 100-400mmL @ 400mm, ISO 400, 1/1600s, F/5.6


----------



## duydaniel (Jun 27, 2013)

serendipidy said:


> My attempt with a 7D, 100-400mmL @ 400mm, ISO 400, 1/1600s, F/5.6



You could cut down the ISO and slower the shutter speed
such as ISO 100 (4 stops down) --> 4*1/1600 = 1/400 --> F5.6 
that should give you the same exposure but with ISO 100 quality image IMO


----------



## serendipidy (Jun 27, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> serendipidy said:
> 
> 
> > My attempt with a 7D, 100-400mmL @ 400mm, ISO 400, 1/1600s, F/5.6
> ...



Good idea. I will try your suggestion.


----------



## mfumbesi (Jun 27, 2013)

strykapose said:


> "The Best Camera You Have is the One with You"
> To me, its a little soft, but I got the shot.


Wow what a great shot. I like the skyscrappers and the neon lights.


----------



## Click (Jun 27, 2013)

Dave_NYC said:


> Here is my Supermoon shot from the night of June 22nd. I used TPE to calculate where the moon was going to rise. What I didn't expect was just how FAST it rose. Seemed like it took 15/20 minutes to go from the horizon to an angle too high to shoot in relation to any buildings on the Brooklyn side. I only had a 70-200 on me, having a 1.4x or longer lens would have been very helpful in this situation.



I like it. Nicely done Dave.


----------



## tron (Jun 28, 2013)

Dave_NYC said:


> Here is my Supermoon shot from the night of June 22nd. I used TPE to calculate where the moon was going to rise. What I didn't expect was just how FAST it rose. Seemed like it took 15/20 minutes to go from the horizon to an angle too high to shoot in relation to any buildings on the Brooklyn side. I only had a 70-200 on me, having a 1.4x or longer lens would have been very helpful in this situation.


Nice shot. I believe however - since the moon is extremely brighter than the bridge - that lowering the highlights to the minimum was not enough. Did you combine 2 different exposures (even from the same raw file)?


----------



## strykapose (Jun 28, 2013)

20Dave said:


> hamada said:
> 
> 
> > looked like every other moon.
> ...



Hamada and Dave, I totally agree with both of you, which is one of the reasons I'd not planned to go shoot the super moon. 
I personally felt taking a photo of the Supermoon is about exciting as watching paint dry. 
My friend Kirit, [a true amateur tog w no formal art education], really wanted to go.
I've been teaching him about composition, and some things that would make a shot interesting.
With student in tow, we walked up/down the Jersey shoreline until I decided it would be nice to have the Supermoon within the framing of the ESB and New Yorker Hotel. 
If I had not have gone, i'm pretty sure he would've shot a photo of the moon, cropped it and have been satisfied.
After he saw how many hits I'd gotten from my "Eclipse" shot, of course he went thru his and posted a similar shot.
Am I upset? No, because I thought out the comp and luck of the moon ducking behind the cloud made it more interesting, plus I've been teaching him about composition.
I do admit I am a little upset because I didn't grab the 5D3 and his D800E blows the 5D2 away.

The point I really want to get to is:
This forum is viewed by many amateurs and first time DSLR owners.
I've seen some stupidly ridiculous questions on here, but I give them credit because they're learning.
True that shooting a picture of the moon may not be exciting to us since we've done it and know there are millions of similar shots, but the excitement comes when a first-timer does it and they are overwhelmed at the results.
Next thing to consider: Composition, How can I take that photo to make it more interesting?

Dave, 
Thanks on your comments regarding my photo and the interesting facts about the moon. 
I will keep them in mind if I ever consider another moon composition shot.


----------



## strykapose (Jun 28, 2013)

mwh1964 said:


> strykapose said:
> 
> 
> > A friend called and wanted to shoot the Supermoon. I was hesitant to go but gave in. I grabbed what was avail; 5D2 & 70-200 Mk I, which I use for lightning shots since I'm not too concerned if they get wet. So, the moon pops out for a few minutes, then comes a light drizzle causing all of the other togs to scatter. Then it ducks under a cloud.
> ...



Thanks. Yes, I was in New Jersey on the pier just south of the Port Imperial Ferry Terminal.


----------



## strykapose (Jun 28, 2013)

mfumbesi said:


> strykapose said:
> 
> 
> > "The Best Camera You Have is the One with You"
> ...



Thank You


----------



## strykapose (Jun 28, 2013)

Dave_NYC said:


> strykapose said:
> 
> 
> > A friend called and wanted to shoot the Supermoon. I was hesitant to go but gave in. I grabbed what was avail; 5D2 & 70-200 Mk I, which I use for lightning shots since I'm not too concerned if they get wet. So, the moon pops out for a few minutes, then comes a light drizzle causing all of the other togs to scatter. Then it ducks under a cloud.
> ...



Thanks Dave NYC


----------



## kkelis (Jun 28, 2013)

Canon 600D with 70-200mkII+2TC


----------

