Blood Wolf Moon - Page 2
PhotoCamel: Your friendly photo community, with free discussion forums, digital photography reviews, photo sharing, galleries, downloads, blogs, photography contests, and prizes.
 


Go Back   PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum > Photography by Genre: Critique and Discussion > Landscape & Travel

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-23-2019   #11
PhotoCamel Supporter DONATED
F1 Camel
 
ceropegia's Avatar
 
Location: Alabama
Posts: 3,710
CamelKarma: 24890877
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Blood Wolf Moon

Quote:
Originally Posted by Promapper View Post
great shots.



I tried to get some shots but it got so cold I could see the light rays freezing just before they entered the lensI Brrrr not used to this anymore.


Regardless which tripod I am using I try to add a little weight to the bottom of the center column or hang it from the center plate where the three legs join up.
Thanks for the tip. I rarely use a tripod but really needed it for this event. It was very cold here, but the location of the moon in the sky was perfect. All I had to do was step out on my deck every few minutes, snap a few shots, then duck back inside to stay warm.
__________________
Martha
In the Appalachian foothills of Northeast Alabama
Ceropegia on Ipernity

Ceropegia on Flicker
ceropegia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2019   #12
PhotoCamel Supporter DONATED
F1 Camel
 
ceropegia's Avatar
 
Location: Alabama
Posts: 3,710
CamelKarma: 24890877
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Blood Wolf Moon

Quote:
Originally Posted by scoundrel1728 View Post
You have been at this long enough to determine how much you use a tripod. You don't use one enough to need a top-of -the-line one, obviously, and it looks like you do most of your shooting where there is plenty of light. Nevertheless, it sounds like you need something sturdier than what you currently have for those occasions where you do need a tripod. You should be able to get something reasonably sturdy for about $100 or less, with a little careful shopping. Meanwhile, you might be able to get by on what you already have if you don't extend your center column too high and perhaps watch it with extending your tripod legs to their maximum. My Slik Pro 330DX does most of what I need, at least to the extent where I might curse its limitations from time to time but not to the extent to go shopping for something better yet, and it is still light enough that I take it with me and use it sometimes on trips. If I expect to do any night shooting, I am quite likely to take it with me.
Thanks for the recommendation. I rarely use a tripod, even when taking night/low light shots. I am usually able to find something to brace the camera on to hold it steady. But, I do want to have a more satisfactory one for those times I really need one.
__________________
Martha
In the Appalachian foothills of Northeast Alabama
Ceropegia on Ipernity

Ceropegia on Flicker
ceropegia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2019   #13
F1 Camel
 
WesternGuy's Avatar
 
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,857
CamelKarma: 6817414
Editing OK?: No
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Blood Wolf Moon

Martha, for star trails and I assume, moon "trails" as well, there is the 500 rule, or the 600 rule as some like to call it. Basically, 500 (or 600) divided by the focal length of the lens you are using gives you the longest exposure in seconds before you start to get blur or trails from the movement of the subject due to the earth's rotation. For example, if you are using a 100mm lens, then the longest exposure you can get before it starts to show trails is 5 seconds - 500÷100 = 5 seconds. The only concern I have with this is that the moon is closer than the stars, so the number of seconds might be less - don't know, but would like to hear from anyone who can cast some light on this.

You can check this site out : https://petapixel.com/2015/01/06/avo...wing-500-rule/

Hope this helps.

WesternGuy
__________________
“The real question is not what you look at but what you see.” Henry David Thoreau

My Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/westernguy/
WesternGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2019   #14
Camel Breath
 
scoundrel1728's Avatar
 
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
Posts: 10,066
CamelKarma: 1469207
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Blood Wolf Moon

The apparent movement of the moon from Earth is about four percent slowerthan that of the stars, which is not enough to render inapplicable the 500 rule, or whatever you you choose to use in its place. However, the rule is based on full=frame equivalent focal length, not actual focal length, and even the 500 rule isn't good enough if you are prone to pixel peeping, and there are adjustments you must also make for the declination - celestial latitude - of the object you are observing. The sun follows an apparent path across the celestial sphere called the ecliptic, wander some 23 degrees about the celestial equator, depending on the time of day and year, but that correction won't be great enough to make much change in the 500 rule either. The moon and planets also stay within a few degrees of the ecliptic, so the 500 rule applies to them too. However, if you are shooting something near one of the celestial poles, e.g., the North Star or Southern Cross, you can catch something of a break from the 500 rule, with the allowable exposure time increasing by about 40 percent (1/2 stop) if your object is within 45 degrees and doubling if your object is within 30 degrees of one of the poles.
scoundrel1728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2019   #15
F1 Camel
 
WesternGuy's Avatar
 
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,857
CamelKarma: 6817414
Editing OK?: No
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Blood Wolf Moon

Quote:
Originally Posted by scoundrel1728 View Post
The apparent movement of the moon from Earth is about four percent slowerthan that of the stars, which is not enough to render inapplicable the 500 rule, or whatever you you choose to use in its place. However, the rule is based on full=frame equivalent focal length, not actual focal length, and even the 500 rule isn't good enough if you are prone to pixel peeping, and there are adjustments you must also make for the declination - celestial latitude - of the object you are observing. The sun follows an apparent path across the celestial sphere called the ecliptic, wander some 23 degrees about the celestial equator, depending on the time of day and year, but that correction won't be great enough to make much change in the 500 rule either. The moon and planets also stay within a few degrees of the ecliptic, so the 500 rule applies to them too. However, if you are shooting something near one of the celestial poles, e.g., the North Star or Southern Cross, you can catch something of a break from the 500 rule, with the allowable exposure time increasing by about 40 percent (1/2 stop) if your object is within 45 degrees and doubling if your object is within 30 degrees of one of the poles.
Scoundrel, thanks for the insight. I knew there would be someone out there that was more versed in the details than I am.



WesternGuy
__________________
“The real question is not what you look at but what you see.” Henry David Thoreau

My Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/westernguy/
WesternGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2019   #16
PhotoCamel Supporter DONATED
F1 Camel
 
ceropegia's Avatar
 
Location: Alabama
Posts: 3,710
CamelKarma: 24890877
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Blood Wolf Moon

Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternGuy View Post
Martha, for star trails and I assume, moon "trails" as well, there is the 500 rule, or the 600 rule as some like to call it. Basically, 500 (or 600) divided by the focal length of the lens you are using gives you the longest exposure in seconds before you start to get blur or trails from the movement of the subject due to the earth's rotation. For example, if you are using a 100mm lens, then the longest exposure you can get before it starts to show trails is 5 seconds - 500÷100 = 5 seconds. The only concern I have with this is that the moon is closer than the stars, so the number of seconds might be less - don't know, but would like to hear from anyone who can cast some light on this.

You can check this site out : https://petapixel.com/2015/01/06/avo...wing-500-rule/

Hope this helps.

WesternGuy
Quote:
Originally Posted by scoundrel1728 View Post
The apparent movement of the moon from Earth is about four percent slowerthan that of the stars, which is not enough to render inapplicable the 500 rule, or whatever you you choose to use in its place. However, the rule is based on full=frame equivalent focal length, not actual focal length, and even the 500 rule isn't good enough if you are prone to pixel peeping, and there are adjustments you must also make for the declination - celestial latitude - of the object you are observing. The sun follows an apparent path across the celestial sphere called the ecliptic, wander some 23 degrees about the celestial equator, depending on the time of day and year, but that correction won't be great enough to make much change in the 500 rule either. The moon and planets also stay within a few degrees of the ecliptic, so the 500 rule applies to them too. However, if you are shooting something near one of the celestial poles, e.g., the North Star or Southern Cross, you can catch something of a break from the 500 rule, with the allowable exposure time increasing by about 40 percent (1/2 stop) if your object is within 45 degrees and doubling if your object is within 30 degrees of one of the poles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternGuy View Post
Scoundrel, thanks for the insight. I knew there would be someone out there that was more versed in the details than I am.



WesternGuy
FYI, as I mentioned, I used my Canon PowerShot SX60 HS with a 65X optical zoom. For the final blood moon shot, I zoomed as far a possible to to get an acceptable brightness and size to enable the the camera to autofocus. I had no idea what the focal length was. Basically except for setting the ISO on 400 to get a faster exposure time and choosing spot metering, I let the camera do its thing. Per the Exif data, the focal length used for the shot was 188.04 with a 1 sec exposure time at f/5.6. So based on your discussion of the 500 rule, motion blur probably was not a factor in the lack of sharpness. My guess now is that if it was not a stability issue with the tripod, it was probably lens quality/abberation or a combination of both. But, considering that I had nothing else that would even come close to capturing the event, I am, as I have said, happy to have gotten what I did.

I have learned a lot from this discussion. Thanks so much for engaging!
__________________
Martha
In the Appalachian foothills of Northeast Alabama
Ceropegia on Ipernity

Ceropegia on Flicker
ceropegia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2019   #17
Alpaca
 
EuroCouple's Avatar
 
Location: Germany
Posts: 24
CamelKarma: 104890
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Blood Wolf Moon

I also tried to get some pictures. But I did not manage the sharpness.
EuroCouple is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2019   #18
F1 Camel
 
gehutch's Avatar
 
Location: NE Tennessee
Posts: 4,707
CamelKarma: 16273323
Editing OK?: Yes
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Blood Wolf Moon

Still, great work from that camera...
gehutch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019   #19
Camel Breath
 
scoundrel1728's Avatar
 
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
Posts: 10,066
CamelKarma: 1469207
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Blood Wolf Moon

Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternGuy View Post
Martha, for star trails and I assume, moon "trails" as well, there is the 500 rule, or the 600 rule as some like to call it.
Moon trails? Photographically, the moon is a sunlit object, though a very dark one, that is exposed to look bright, and would normally be exposed to make it three stops brighter than other sunlit objects, more or less. Because of the moons large apparent size, the moon would just look like any other motion-blurred object, which photographically isn't a good look. Better to render the moon sharp than attempt a "moon trail," I would say. That said, if you think otherwise, you are certainly welcome to try.
scoundrel1728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2019   #20
PhotoCamel Supporter DONATED
F1 Camel
 
ceropegia's Avatar
 
Location: Alabama
Posts: 3,710
CamelKarma: 24890877
Editing OK?: Ask First
Constructive Critique?: Yes
Default Re: Blood Wolf Moon

Quote:
Originally Posted by gehutch View Post
Still, great work from that camera...
Thanks!


__________________
Members don't see ads in threads. Register for your free account today and become a member of PhotoCamel to open up the site's many benefits and features.
__________________
Martha
In the Appalachian foothills of Northeast Alabama
Ceropegia on Ipernity

Ceropegia on Flicker
ceropegia is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

« PhotoCamel - Your Friendly Photography Forum > Photography by Genre: Critique and Discussion > Landscape & Travel »


Share this topic:


Tags
blood, eclipse, lunar, moon, total
Thread Tools
Display Modes