Below is a very very reduced size version of my montage (8.3% size). I can post a larger one if people want, though I'll probably watermark it. The details are: Each image is a combination of at least 2 (up to 10) median-combined images to reduce noise. Each image was color-processed in the same way, based upon the first image, so the colors are "real." They were taken with a 1000 mm f/16 lens on a Canon DSLR (8.2 Mpx) camera at ISO 100. Exposure time varied from 1/125-sec to 75 seconds, which by my calculations means the moon varied in brightness by over a factor of 20,000x. Tracking was provided by piggybacking on an 18" telescope. Each moon image was originally ~20" in diameter. They were shrunk to 8" in diameter. (This is at 72 ppi.) This implies a seeing of around 2 arcsec, which is reasonable for my location. All images were processed in "full" 16-bit color (65,536 vs. 8-bit 256 colors). The final montage was created at 120"x80" at 72 ppi and 16-bit color. It weighs in at around 340 MB (and takes over 2 GB of RAM to load). I'm going to try to print it at 12x18 at Costco (where I've had previous success and this size is only $3 so it's no loss if it sucks) and see what it looks like. I would like to print it larger (20x30 or 30x45), so if anyone knows of LOCAL (in the Boulder/Denver, CO area) quality print lab that will print at those sizes or larger that are NOT expensive (like there's a lab people use but a 20x30 is $102), please let me know. I'm open to critiques, comments, criticisms, compliments, and questions (like my technique for getting detail during the partial umbral phases on the penumbral part). I'm especially interested in what people think about the cloudy spots ... since that was the beginning of the penumbral eclipse anyway, it'd be incredibly easy to fake them, which I'm tempted to do. And I'm also thinking of doing some drastic adjustments to the final image so that it's a little more obvious that it's the moon silhouetting some trees at it sets. Thanks for looking!