Skip to comments.
Who's its rocker - me or the moon?
The sky
| 2AM. If there's more to it then that, I'm too tired to know
| Jesse
Posted on 06/09/2009 2:34:03 AM PDT by mrjesse
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-27 last
To: sig226
all i ever get is a white overexposed circle of the moon and black everywhere else.
21
posted on
06/09/2009 7:46:36 AM PDT
by
Mr. K
(physically unabel to proofreed (<---oops))
To: Mr. K
What settings did you use? Film or digital?
22
posted on
06/09/2009 8:03:08 AM PDT
by
sig226
(Real power is not the ability to destroy an enemy. It is the willingness to do it.)
To: Mr. K
Mr. K,
Yes, since the moon is about "a million times" brighter then the light comining off of the ground on a moonlit night, and since cameras have a certain dynamic range, it is not possible to get detail on the moon and on the ground at the same time in a single shot without artificial lighting on the ground.
If the ground is well exposed, the moon will be one great washed out spot.
So yes, you could take two photos - one exposed for the moon and one exposed for the ground, and then merge them.
See how I covered the moon with my hands for most of the exposure:
Moonlit Photos (See sixth picture)
If your camera supports a raw mode that supports 12 or 14 bits per color, you can also change the response curve on the photo to bring out the underexposed portions without losing all of the detail on the fully exposed portions, but that doesn't look too good. However, if your scene doesn't move too much, you can take a whole bunch of photos on a tripod, then stack them to form a 16 bit per color (36 bit RGB image) and that gives you a lot of dynamic range, so then you can change the curves and get detail for the bright and the dark, like I explain here:
Indoor-Outdoor exposure experiments
Also, here's an example of two photos - one being correctly exposed for indoors and the other for outdoors - being stacked. The detail is reduced everywhere, but the window, which was washed out completely, now does show some detail of outside.
Two Stacked
Hope this helps! Have fun. I gotta run.
-Jesse
23
posted on
06/09/2009 10:12:17 AM PDT
by
mrjesse
(The big bang and dark matter exist only in black holes that are supposed to be full of gray matter)
To: mrjesse
The moon is only 97% full.
The “broken” bit will show up in 2-3 days.
Worry not.
24
posted on
06/09/2009 10:23:41 AM PDT
by
Salamander
(Cursed with Second Sight.)
To: shibumi
I’m a voodoo chile, lord I’m a voodoo chile.
Yeah.
The night I was born, lord the moon stood a fire red.
Said the night I was born, the moon turned a fire red.
My poor mother her cryin’, she said “The gypsy was right!”
And she fell right dead.
Hey, and he said “Fly on, fly on!”, ‘cause I’m a voodoo chile, baby, voodoo chile.
25
posted on
06/09/2009 10:27:58 AM PDT
by
Salamander
(Cursed with Second Sight.)
To: right way right
After Mt St Helens blew, we had gorgeous red moons on the east coast for months.
We still see them often, depending on whether some jack pine barrens are wild-burning in VA or not.
I have a suspicion that the Revelation “red moon” will *not* be something as sublime and nice as the regular “red moons”.
26
posted on
06/09/2009 10:32:21 AM PDT
by
Salamander
(Cursed with Second Sight.)
To: Daffynition
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-27 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson