Moon

controld

Tried to rush out and catch the full moon last night while it was low in the sky. Couldn't see it from the deck so I had to shoot out the living room window. :cry I am also pretty sure, after looking at Shay's moon calculator, that I overexposed it a bit.

I also learned that my old plastic tripod from my P/S camera will not suffice for keeping any lens on my DSLR still - even indoors. Used a cable release and mirror lockup to try and help.

Exposure: 1/250th
Aperture: f/8
Focal Length: 560 (400 + 1.4)

Before PP:



Post PP (and more RAW work):



- Mike

manta1900

That's the best I could do with this compressed photo...

nikos

Moon @ 560mm
Mike,

If you have the RAW file, you can possibly get more detail out the image.
I took this shot last night since we had clear skies. My first few shots, I used my Canon 400 5.6 lens with 2 stacked 1.4x extenders for a total focal length of ~800mm.

I then removed one of the extenders and took a few shots @ 560mm. After post processing the images, I found that I had sharper results and more detail with the single 1.4x extender.




If you want a more detailed description of the post processing, check out the Dan Margulis LAB sticky thread in the Finishers forum or I can give you a step by step of what I did.

Nikos

controld

manta1900 wrote:

That's the best I could do with this compressed photo...

That is quite an improvement! I'll go back to the RAW file and see what I can do.

- Mike

controld

nikos wrote:

We had clear skies last night and I decided to try taking a shot of the moon. My first few shots, I used my Canon 400 5.6 lens with 2 stacked 1.4x extenders for a total focal length of ~800mm.

I then removed one of the extenders and took a few shots @ 560mm. After post processing the images, I found that I had sharper results and more detail with the single 1.4x extender.

I did all of the post processing in LAB using techniques in Dan Margulis' book.

Since I corrected the white balance in RAW, the majority of the adjustments were to the L channel (S&H, curve adjustments, and USM)

Wow! I am shamed again! I need to start getting deep into the PP action. I suspect my wobbly tripod and living room window may cap my potential with this batch though.

- Mike

controld

Allrighty - this is my attempt at fixing the exposure and tonality in RAW with more attention to detail and then LAB sharpening in Photoshop. Quite a difference.



- Mike

SloYerRoll

controld wrote:

I need to start getting deep into the PP action.

Friendly advice. Make sure you don't get too wrapped up in pp. It can be a beast of it's own and you can get so wrapped up in it that you forget how to shoot in the first place!!

I was a designer in my previous career and when I started really taking shooting seriously. I spent more time in the digital darkroom than in the field shooting things. Much more fun to shoot!

JMO

controld

SloYerRoll wrote:

Friendly advice. Make sure you don't get too wrapped up in pp. It can be a beast of it's own and you can get so wrapped up in it that you forget how to shoot in the first place!!

I was a designer in my previous career and when I started really taking shooting seriously. I spent more time in the digital darkroom than in the field shooting things. Much more fun to shoot!

JMO

Understood, and I agree! Seems like this shot is almost garbage without it though. Good to know it is salvageable to some degree.

- Mike

jsedlak

All I can say is THANK YOU!

I have been waiting for someone to get a shot of the moon from the past couple of days. The maximum focal length I have is 55mm so I did not even try... but skies have been clear and the moon has been bright!

Anyways, good shot!

Awais Yaqub

Nice recovery
But at 1/250 isn't it possible to get shot even without tripod ?
Btw my tripod has also a problem where i compose shot and remove my hand from camera whole composition is ruined

controld

Awais Yaqub wrote:

Nice recovery
But at 1/250 isn't it possible to get shot even without tripod ?
Btw my tripod has also a problem where i compose shot and remove my hand from camera whole composition is ruined

Not while shooting at 580mm . Even the old rule of thumb of 1/focal for minimum shutter speed goes out the window at longer lengths in my experience (granted it is limited). I'd need to be shooting 1/1500+ to shoot handheld with the long glass.

Sounds like you are using a cheap tripod like me. The head is plastic, which means it flexes under the weight of the camera/lens and also when you touch it. So you have to attempt to predict the shift in position when you let go and compose accordingly. A new tripod is high on my Christmas wish list.

- Mike

nikos

controld wrote:

Allrighty - this is my attempt at fixing the exposure and tonality in RAW with more attention to detail and then LAB sharpening in Photoshop. Quite a difference.



- Mike

Mike,
Isn't it amazing how much detail you can pull out of the original RAW image?


Here's my workflow:
Caution: since I'm at work being continually interrupted, I'm keeping this concise with the assumption that you're not a complete PS CS2 newbie.

RAW (Adobe ACR)
1. Crop the image
2. Adjust the WB to your liking. I personally prefer it to be slightly warmer than neutral.
2. Referring to the histogram, expose for the highlights. You can also Option- slide the exposure scrubber to until you see the initial clipping of th e highlights.
3. If the image seems too washed out, jump to the brightness scrubber and back it down so that midtones are not clustered to the right of the histogram.
4. Adjust the shadows until you start getting some depth in the craters.

Optional
Zero out the contrast slider and then make your own adjustments using the curves to bring some more depth to the moon.

5. Save

Adobe Photoshop
1. Convert to LAB

2. Make a duplicate copy of the background layer

3. Select the Luminosity channel and then choose the Shadows & Highlight filter.
a. I just want to bring back a bit more detail in the highlights so I set the highlight amount from 10-15 and then move the Tonal Width slider to the right until I get a bit more detail throughout the moon.

4. Make a new curves adjustment layer and make sure the Luminosity channel is selected.
a. since there's not a very large tonal range in the moon, make two points on the curve for your highlights and darker areas and bring those two points towards each other to bump up the contrast to your liking.

5. If you want a bit more color variation on the moon, you can make another curves adjustment layer and steepen the A & B curves to boost the saturation. Since you're using a separate Adjustment Layer, you can go a bit overboard with the steepening because you can later change the layer's opacity to your liking.

6. Lastly, I combined all the layers into one and performed a traditional USM on the L channel using values around 100, 8, 2

HTH,
Nikos

Skippy

controld wrote:

Tried to rush out and catch the full moon last night while it was low in the sky. Couldn't see it from the deck so I had to shoot out the living room window. :cry I am also pretty sure, after looking at Shay's moon calculator, that I overexposed it a bit.
I also learned that my old plastic tripod from my P/S camera will not suffice for keeping any lens on my DSLR still - even indoors. Used a cable release and mirror lockup to try and help.
Exposure: 1/250th
Aperture: f/8
Focal Length: 560 (400 + 1.4)
Before PP:
Post PP (and more RAW work):
- Mike

Hi Mike......... I feel your pain mate you'd think something as big as the moon would be pretty easy to shoot wouldn't you, but it not as easy as it seems.

Your first shot you have almost a ghosting effect in the back ground where you can almost see a duplicate outline of the moon.
The second shot still doesn't look right either, but it's a very good attempt
I've only managed to get one reasonable shot of the moon myself.

Good luck with your moon shots.......... Skippy (Australia)

kdog

nikos wrote:

After post processing the images, I found that I had sharper results and more detail with the single 1.4x extender.

Did you try it with no TC on the 400mm? It may have been even better.

Regards,
-joel

nikos

kdog wrote:

Did you try it with no TC on the 400mm? It may have been even better.

Regards,
-joel

Funny, that hasn't crossed my mind since the Moon was small in size. The Canon 400 is one of the sharpest lenses and it would have been worth a try. I'm going to try it the next time we get a nice, crisp & clear night sky.

I also think a partial Moon is more interesting than a full moon since the shadows emphasize the craters for a more dramatic shot.

Nikos