Cleveland Harvest Moonrise

PhotoDude 2

RonD200

Cool shot of Cleveland Dan

erich6

Sorry, but I don't like the way it looks. I think it's OK to merge photos of the moon with other landscapes/citiscapes but you have to make sure it looks like the moon really was there. Try blending it a bit more with less than 100% opacity so you can get some of the same atmosphere across it.

While you can make the moon unrealistically large relative to the subject I think this may be a bit much.

Erich

PhotoDude 2

Thanks for your opinion Eric, but this evening it really was this big, I didn't over enhance the size of it. There were 25 other photographers that evening getting simular shots. see link http://neoshoots.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=137

~Daniel

RonD200

PhotoDude 2 wrote:

Thanks for your opinion Eric, but this evening it really was this big, I didn't over enhance the size of it. There were 25 other photographers that evening getting simular shots. see link http://neoshoots.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=137

~Daniel

I'll have to stick up for Dan, I was one of the other photographers there that night and the moon was huge.

Here's one of my shots from that night, the problem everyone had was with exposure, the moon was very bright and the lighted buildings very dark in comparison. This is a single exposure and I used the shadow/highlight filter to try and lighten the buildings. The other technique people were using was to take an exposure of the moon and then one of the buildings and combining the photos.

thdizzy

erich6 wrote:

Sorry, but I don't like the way it looks

I agree with erich; not regarding the size but regarding the moon itself.

Huge is one thing but the moon looks totally fake compared to Ron's moon. Considering the haze (smog, humidity, dust, etc) there is no way (IMHO) that the moon could appear so clear and sharp compared to Ron's moon. To add... Craters, landscape, and the such don't match Ron's.

I might be totally wrong but I say those are two separate images

(ok...I just checked daniel's site and now I know I was right after looking at the earth rotating around the earth http://danielflockephotography.smugmug.com/gallery/2066286/1/106334946)

Interesting...

RonD200

thdizzy wrote:

I agree with erich; not regarding the size but regarding the moon itself.

Huge is one thing but the moon looks totally fake compared to Ron's moon. Considering the haze (smog, humidity, dust, etc) there is no way (IMHO) that the moon could appear so clear and sharp compared to Ron's moon. To add... Craters, landscape, and the such don't match Ron's.

I might be totally wrong but I say those are two separate images

(ok...I just checked daniel's site and now I know I was right after looking at the earth rotating around the earth http://danielflockephotography.smugmug.com/gallery/2066286/1/106334946)

Interesting...

Thanks for your comments Todd, Dan's shot is indeed two separate photos whereas mine is one, the moon was a bright yellow color near the horizon but became white as it rose and moved to the right. My shot is pretty noisy when you blow it up. But it was a fun shoot anyway, 25 of us stood on a bluff and photographed the moonrise. Most people got blown out moons and properly exposed buildings or a properly exposed moon and dark buildings. It was pretty cool to see the moon rise though.


(Dan probably should of explained how he created the shot in his first post, but he just joined the forum and was just learning how to post photos. I know he also did a photo for fun of the earth rising above Cleveland using a photo of earth that he got from the NASA site.)