Blue Moon over Setubal, Portugal a few minutes ago. July the 1.st 2007 - 10h 48m local time.
ISO 100, 1/200s, f/5.6
20D + 1.4 II + 70-200 IS L USM f/2.8 at the maximum.
Nikolai:
Your Moons are always better than mine. Normal, as you are an expert and I am not. But tell me: which treatments have you done ?
It's not me - I simply have 400mm at my disposal vs your 200mm. Makes 100% difference...
Treatment was very simple and much akin to yours methink:
bluish overlay, color mode, than some blend-if magic and finally a linear gradient over a mask...
hiya --- did you do some other PS magic on it? It looks kinda "PS watercolored" Else...there was a lot of atmospheric turbulence (think heat waves coming off asphalt) creating that odd-blur effect.
It seemed like all the small craters and striking highland features are blurred into one another. I guess being an amateur astronomer/astronomy educator I'm a bit of a realist with astronomical imagery.
Else - good contrast on white and 'shades of gray' areas I wish I could try again tonight, but I didn't borrow my friend's T-adapter.
It's not me - I simply have 400mm at my disposal vs your 200mm. Makes 100% difference...
Treatment was very simple and much akin to yours methink:
bluish overlay, color mode, than some blend-if magic and finally a linear gradient over a mask...
"blend-if magic"
what's that? I only do basics in PS...maybe that's what I'm seeing as "watercolored"
Can I see what your original was next to the PS'd version? I'd like to see what the treatment did compared to an untouched jpg ..if ya don't mind (...teachable moment...)
what's that? I only do basics in PS...maybe that's what I'm seeing as "watercolored"
Can I see what your original was next to the PS'd version? I'd like to see what the treatment did compared to an untouched jpg ..if ya don't mind (...teachable moment...)
A
I normally prefer not to do that, but in the interest of science - here's "straight from the camera" (if there is such a thing for RAW) version (only cropped)
As to the blend-if sliders - it's a part of a layer style. I'm afraid its detailed usage is a bit too complex for this simplistic class of ours. Just do a search for "blend-if" here on dgrin (or google for it), you'll get tons of info.
I normally prefer not to do that, but in the interest of science - here's "straight from the camera" (if there is such a thing for RAW) version (only cropped)
As to the blend-if sliders - it's a part of a layer style. I'm afraid its detailed usage is a bit too complex for this simplistic class of ours. Just do a search for "blenf-if" here on dgrin (or google for it), you'll get tons of info.
HTH
thanks Nikolai
I'm amazed (after seeing what we are calling 'au natural') how you were able to pull out the maria (darker smooth areas) and not blow out the uber-bright craters!
I played with your original briefly in PS 'doing what I usually do' and didn't come close. Lots to learn, lots to learn!
thanks Nikolai
I'm amazed (after seeing what we are calling 'au natural') how you were able to pull out the maria (darker smooth areas) and not blow out the uber-bright craters!
It was mostly classic S-curve, albeit rather steep one. The rest is just icing on a cake...:-)
Thank you!
I wonder, why is it so dark? Monitor? Intention?
I had three that i kept on my computer.. this was the darker of the three but i thought it showed the most detail. yes i agree it is dark but i didnt want blown out areas either. the others are posted to my flickr account in my signature. Im sure my settings were different for that one in particular. i took quite a few to insure i got at least a couple for keeps
Lurking is good...
...while lurking thru galleries I found your thread, Nik and have so enjoyed it. However, some of the entries make my brain hurt! So much to learn.
This post probably breaks ALL of your rules but it was the first moon picture I tried (last August) and could not believe what I captured when the photos were d/l ed! Thought you might enjoy it.....only adjusted levels a bit and sharpened.....
...yes, the bird made a appearance...
This thread has now made anxious to "shoot the moon" again (will actually review the rules). Thanks for all the information and great pictures submitted.
...while lurking thru galleries I found your thread, Nik and have so enjoyed it. However, some of the entries make my brain hurt! So much to learn.
This post probably breaks ALL of your rules but it was the first moon picture I tried (last August) and could not believe what I captured when the photos were d/l ed! Thought you might enjoy it.....only adjusted levels a bit and sharpened.....
...yes, the bird made a appearance...
This thread has now made anxious to "shoot the moon" again (will actually review the rules). Thanks for all the information and great pictures submitted.
Maureen
Maureen, thank you for playing, but let's not forget Da Rule #1: Fresh Pictures Only!
....looks like I should have put up the .cr2 file to show you I am not lying.....:cry...oh, well....
It's not a matter of trust, of course I believe you. I'm only saying that the moon is a very seasy subject to work with and more often than not, composite images do tend to look better than the real ones:
The exif says 6:20 pm, although I had remembered it being earlier in the day... anyway - shot through a telescope (Meade ETX125)
Oh, telescope! Thanks for posting!
If nothign else, your image is one of the most 3D-looking moon shots I have ever seen. I wonder if it's daytime or telescope optics...
Oops, just saw this...
But here is another recent shot. I oriented the image the way the others in this thread are laid out, rather than the way the moon is displayed in my astronomer's guide as in my "Moon over Colorado" thread:
and here is what the camera/telescope setup looks like:
The scope is a Meade ETX-105EC, approximately 1470mm, attached to a Canon 40D.
But here is another recent shot. I oriented the image the way the others in this thread are laid out, rather than the way the moon is displayed in my astronomer's guide as in my "Moon over Colorado" thread:
and here is what the camera/telescope setup looks like:
The scope is a Meade ETX-105EC, approximately 1470mm, attached to a Canon 40D.
Cheers,
Mike
Mike, thank you very much!
Do you think you can post a link to a 100% (at least partial) crop? I wonder how it looks at 1470mm....
Comments
It's not me - I simply have 400mm at my disposal vs your 200mm. Makes 100% difference...
Treatment was very simple and much akin to yours methink:
bluish overlay, color mode, than some blend-if magic and finally a linear gradient over a mask...
hiya --- did you do some other PS magic on it? It looks kinda "PS watercolored" Else...there was a lot of atmospheric turbulence (think heat waves coming off asphalt) creating that odd-blur effect.
It seemed like all the small craters and striking highland features are blurred into one another. I guess being an amateur astronomer/astronomy educator I'm a bit of a realist with astronomical imagery.
Else - good contrast on white and 'shades of gray' areas
A
"blend-if magic"
what's that? I only do basics in PS...maybe that's what I'm seeing as "watercolored"
Can I see what your original was next to the PS'd version? I'd like to see what the treatment did compared to an untouched jpg ..if ya don't mind (...teachable moment...)
A
I normally prefer not to do that, but in the interest of science - here's "straight from the camera" (if there is such a thing for RAW) version (only cropped)
As to the blend-if sliders - it's a part of a layer style. I'm afraid its detailed usage is a bit too complex for this simplistic class of ours. Just do a search for "blend-if" here on dgrin (or google for it), you'll get tons of info.
HTH
thanks Nikolai
I'm amazed (after seeing what we are calling 'au natural') how you were able to pull out the maria (darker smooth areas) and not blow out the uber-bright craters!
I played with your original briefly in PS 'doing what I usually do' and didn't come close. Lots to learn, lots to learn!
Adrienne
Blue Moon over SoCal
300D, 1/640s, f/11, ISO 200, 70-200+1.4xTC, hand held
See you again in December 2009!
Maybe by then I'll have the 300mm f/2.8L IS
Just get 100-400 IS now, it's worth it:-)
1/250, 5.6,ISO100, 300mm
Thank you!
I wonder, why is it so dark? Monitor? Intention?
I had three that i kept on my computer.. this was the darker of the three but i thought it showed the most detail. yes i agree it is dark but i didnt want blown out areas either. the others are posted to my flickr account in my signature. Im sure my settings were different for that one in particular. i took quite a few to insure i got at least a couple for keeps
...while lurking thru galleries I found your thread, Nik and have so enjoyed it. However, some of the entries make my brain hurt! So much to learn.
This post probably breaks ALL of your rules but it was the first moon picture I tried (last August) and could not believe what I captured when the photos were d/l ed! Thought you might enjoy it.....only adjusted levels a bit and sharpened.....
...yes, the bird made a appearance...
This thread has now made anxious to "shoot the moon" again (will actually review the rules). Thanks for all the information and great pictures submitted.
Maureen
Maureen, thank you for playing, but let's not forget Da Rule #1: Fresh Pictures Only!
...so sorry
my bad :whip....OK no more "show (off) and tell"......
Maureen
....looks like I should have put up the .cr2 file to show you I am not lying.....:cry...oh, well....
Taken during daylight and converted to b&w for contrast.
:ivar
blog ~ Galleries ~ Facebook
:ivar
blog ~ Galleries ~ Facebook
If nothign else, your image is one of the most 3D-looking moon shots I have ever seen. I wonder if it's daytime or telescope optics...
http://spbdesigns.com
http://gallery.spbdesigns.com
But here is another recent shot. I oriented the image the way the others in this thread are laid out, rather than the way the moon is displayed in my astronomer's guide as in my "Moon over Colorado" thread:
and here is what the camera/telescope setup looks like:
The scope is a Meade ETX-105EC, approximately 1470mm, attached to a Canon 40D.
Cheers,
Mike
Mike, thank you very much!
Do you think you can post a link to a 100% (at least partial) crop? I wonder how it looks at 1470mm....
Nikolai,
Sure, here is a 100% crop...
Cheers,
Mike
OMG!
You're officially the new Moon King now!
Nikolai,
However, thank goodness this guy didn't enter (wow!):
http://www.pbase.com/jayseejay/image/54692097/original
:uhoh
Cheers,
Mike
+1 on wow!
Ain't it amazing what a regular person with a regular means can do nowadays!