Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 60
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eugenio Oregón
    Posts
    8,382

    Special Edition MPC? - You better get up butt early next Saturday 12/10!!!

    Full eclipse peaks at 6 AM and it's going to be about 13 degrees altitude, and 18 degrees north of due west (roughly for most of us who live in the western midlatitudes)

    http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/astron...s/lunar-ecl-us
    http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/astron...ices/alt-az-us

    Not super low altitude, but should be just low enough to compose against city skylines, mountains, trees you name it. Supposed to be clear out west too, at least by the latest forecast.

    Anyone want to make it a special edition MPC????? Moderated by whoever wins the Stress contest? We can still have our normal MPC and just make this a little bonus round?
    Last edited by SchralphMacchio; 12-05-2011 at 06:33 PM. Reason: (moon sets in the west, not east!!!)
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    CO/AK
    Posts
    2,119
    I'd be down for this...if the weather here wasn't supposed to be super cloudy all weekend.

    We've won it. It's going to get better now. You can sort of tell these things.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    16,124
    this is so not fair. shralph was already planning on getting up early Saturday morning anyway.
    powdork.com - new and improved, with 20% more dork.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MT
    Posts
    889
    Went hiking today to find a spot to shoot this from. Really looking forward to this and I hope it pans out the way I see it in my head.

    I've been using The Photographer's Ephemeris to calculate the angles and the altitude of the moon for this and for the location at which I took the attached picture below, the angles and times look like this.



    The lighter blue line is the where the moon will set behind the mountains at roughly 7:11 PM. Judging by the times for the eclipse from the site that Schralph posted above,

    Moon's
    Azimuth Altitude
    h m o o
    Moonrise 2011 Dec 09 16:05 57.0 ----
    Moon enters penumbra 2011 Dec 10 04:31.8 269.5 32.1
    Moon enters umbra 2011 Dec 10 05:45.4 281.7 19.7
    Moon enters totality 2011 Dec 10 07:05.7 294.6 7.0
    Middle of eclipse 2011 Dec 10 07:31.8 298.9 3.1
    Moonset 2011 Dec 10 07:58 303.3 ----
    The moon will set after 7 minutes of being in totality and over an hour of being eclipsed in some way and should set behind the mountains somewhere around the middle of the image attached below.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTGR Forums1323129929.571467.jpg 
Views:	396 
Size:	122.7 KB 
ID:	105491  
    Last edited by OverTurn; 12-05-2011 at 06:12 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eugenio Oregón
    Posts
    8,382
    oh come on powdork, getting up at 5 to go shoot something from 5:45 to 6:30 is not that early.

    Unless you have a long hike to get to where you want to get to. But I've gotten up at 4:30 to take pictures before. You should be able to shoot some awesome photos from Pope pr Kiva Beach even! Just have to do a little trigonometry - compare the elevation of Jakes to the altitude of the moon. I did some basic trig and 100 feet tall turns into 435 away at -7- *edit: 13 degrees. So at 2000 feet above you, you need to be about 9000 feet away to frame the moon right above the peak - or just under 2 miles. Hmm, 1 mile for every 1000 feet of vert is an easier metric for those bigger peaks.

    OverTurn, that looks awesome, good luck! I'd recommend you bring the longest lens you own though, so that the moon will be relatively large compared to the subject.
    Last edited by SchralphMacchio; 12-05-2011 at 11:20 PM.
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    16,124
    don't i have to be at nevada beach. i was liking it better when it was in the east. emerald bay would have been perfect. still might be though
    powdork.com - new and improved, with 20% more dork.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MT
    Posts
    889
    Quote Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio View Post
    OverTurn, that looks awesome, good luck! I'd recommend you bring the longest lens you own though, so that the moon will be relatively large compared to the subject.
    I'm gonna...200mm on APS-C...300mm gonna be enough from 5-6 miles away? We'll see. I'm unsure if I want to try the location planned above or something farther up the ridge. Might have to go exploring again on Wednesday to see if anywhere along this ridge is clear for shots.



    The moon setting right behind Ross Peak would be kickass.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    SnoqWA
    Posts
    2,599
    Quote Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio View Post
    I did some basic trig and 100 feet tall turns into 435 away at 7 degrees. So at 2000 feet above you, you need to be about 9000 feet away to frame the moon right above the peak - or just under 2 miles. Hmm, 1 mile for every 1000 feet of vert is an easier metric for those bigger peaks.
    Basic trig has failed you.

    I'm game to try it out, though I don't really have any idea of where to shoot from around here. Northwest is a pretty boring view from the U-district. Guess I'll have to attempt getting up early and drive/hike somewhere.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    MT
    Posts
    4,022
    Quote Originally Posted by OverTurn View Post
    Went hiking today to find a spot to shoot this from. Really looking forward to this and I hope it pans out the way I see it in my head.

    Bring a chainsaw and take out some of those foreground trees. Otherwise, cool view!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MT
    Posts
    889
    Quote Originally Posted by single View Post
    Bring a chainsaw and take out some of those foreground trees. Otherwise, cool view!
    I've thought about it...there was one spot that would have been perfect but it had this honkin huge pine right in the middle of the frame. Dead, and I bet if I'd kicked it just a little bit it might have toppled over. Tempting...

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eugenio Oregón
    Posts
    8,382
    Quote Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio View Post
    I did some basic trig and 100 feet tall turns into 435 away at 7 degrees
    Quote Originally Posted by bfree View Post
    Basic trig has failed you.
    No, just my memory. I don't remember where I got 7 degrees from - I think I was looking at the angle of the Golden Gate Bridge from a spot I was scoping out. I'm looking at my drawings now and my trig says 100 feet tall turns into 435 feet away at 13 degrees, which is the middle of the eclipse for where we are.

    I *really, really* wanted to be able to shoot the GG bridge but I figured that unless I could rent a yacht or a barge I was not going to be able to get to the spot I needed to compose the shot I had in mind. Either the moon would not be over the middle of the bridge, or it would be way high up above the bridge and not as impressive. Plus I'm driving to Tahoe on Saturday morning and I don't live in SF ... so I just scoped a spot at the Oakland skyline just around the corner from my house. Much less exciting than a blood red moon over a red GG bridge, but much less effort. I'm still reconsidering the GG bridge idea - maybe another spot won't have as bad an angle as I think.

    I think it's most important to have the subject right above the ridgeline / skyline so that you can zoom in with a long lens and the moon will look huge compared to what you are shooting.
    The trick is finding a location where you get both angles dialed!!!
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    16,124
    Quote Originally Posted by single View Post
    Bring a chainsaw and take out some of those foreground trees. Otherwise, cool view!
    no way man. think how cool the eclipse would be if the ridge was on fire!
    powdork.com - new and improved, with 20% more dork.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eugenio Oregón
    Posts
    8,382
    Quote Originally Posted by OverTurn View Post
    300mm gonna be enough from 5-6 miles away?
    Maybe, just not sure how much of the frame the moon will take up. I have a 200mm lens on APS-C and I think you really need to go up to 300mm or more shooting that far away. I just did some more basic trig (check my math!) and at 320mm (full frame) you have a 6.4 degree horizontal field of view, which at 6 miles out gives you a horizontal frame size of about 3500 feet. So you'll get the peak but I'm just not sure how much of the moon.

    http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/calc.htm

    6 miles * tan(3.2 degrees) * 2 (halves of the isosceles triangle I set up) * 5280 feet/mile is about 3500 feet. You'll get the entire mountain but not sure how big the moon will be.

    Dan Mingori shot this with 300mm on an APS-C (the only reason I am sharing that is because he posted that on TGR in 2010 and you can still google it). I have no idea how far away, but you get the picture - longer the lens, the more it fills the frame with the moon. Imagine this shot with a blood red moon!

    http://www.danmingoriphotography.com...4f43a#hdc4f43a
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MT
    Posts
    889
    I also have a 4/3rds camera that will make the 200mm an effective 400mm...thinking that might be a better choice despite the difficulty in focusing (shouldn't be a problem since i'll be focusing on something 6 miles away) and the lower image quality/MP

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eugenio Oregón
    Posts
    8,382
    well if weight isn't an issue, bring them both!

    Can you manually focus through the LCD on the 4/3 camera? If there is not enough light in the sky to focus on the mountain, then the moon should still be pretty easy to focus via the LCD. But then the mountain will be in front of the focus plane so maybe focus on the moon and back off a hair. I'm not sure what time civil twilight starts, but you might have some color in the sky at that time of morning.
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MT
    Posts
    889
    Yup, can focus via live view. I'm gonna bring them both and maybe see about renting a longer lens just for the day? This lens is MF only so that will be my only option, really. Civil twilight will be around 7:19 for this location, according to TPE.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The Republic-ish
    Posts
    262
    I'll be up and out shooting the eclipse on my way to another shoot. Who has the best moon shooting tips?

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    9,002
    I'm not science savvy. Will this be able to be seen from the East coast?
    Brought to you by Carl's Jr.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    SnoqWA
    Posts
    2,599
    Quote Originally Posted by systemoverblow'd View Post
    I'm not science savvy. Will this be able to be seen from the East coast?
    Not really. The moon will have set before much has happened on the east coast. Check the link in the OP's post for your city.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MT
    Posts
    889
    Quote Originally Posted by Gregger View Post
    I'll be up and out shooting the eclipse on my way to another shoot. Who has the best moon shooting tips?
    Went out for some test shots tonight. No experience on this either so any tips anyone can come up with would be helpful.

    100% crops SOOC.

    1. ISO400


    2. ISO800


    3. ISO1600


    4. ISO100


    5. ISO 800


    6. ISO 1600

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    SnoqWA
    Posts
    2,599
    I'm not that great at this either, but my general strategy is:

    manual focus to infinity
    tripod with remote shutter release or self-timer
    ISO 100
    f/8 or 11, something in the middle of your range for sharpness
    let the exposure dictate your SS (don't blow out the moon like I did on the bottom!) but try to keep this under a second or two, since the moon obviously moves. bump the ISO up if you have to.

    results (cropped a bit at 200mm on a 1.6x sensor):


    Now I need to find an interesting foreground element.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bozeman
    Posts
    1,302
    Dave-bfree's advice is good. I generally get better results using auto focus but my eyes aren't good through the viewfinder.

    Just messed around for a few minutes, tough shooting almost vertical. At least the eclipse will be almost on the horizon.

    500mm-iso500-f8-1/400sec

    Moon2-7879 by jrmorris-mt, on Flickr
    Last edited by mtcham; 12-07-2011 at 08:40 AM.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    in your second home, doing heroin
    Posts
    14,690
    ^ Nice!


    654654

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    2,573
    That is sweet!

    Here is another link discussing moon photography:

    http://www.michaelfrye.com/landscape...this-saturday/

    One other point - you may want to change from AWB to "daylight" setting on WB (which is really a mis-nomer as it is really "neutral" white balance). I believe that to be better for low-light photos with a lot of color so it does not get balanced out. So for full eclipse in red, a neutral/daylight WB may be better.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MT
    Posts
    889
    Quote Originally Posted by Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer View Post
    One other point - you may want to change from AWB to "daylight" setting on WB (which is really a mis-nomer as it is really "neutral" white balance). I believe that to be better for low-light photos with a lot of color so it does not get balanced out. So for full eclipse in red, a neutral/daylight WB may be better.
    That's a good point about the WB...but I'm planning on shooting RAW so adjust in post? I'm pretty psyched about this.
    Last edited by OverTurn; 12-07-2011 at 12:01 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •