Why does my moon look like the sun?I took this

[djrichie28]

The concept seem totally ironic, but the moon is exposed in direct sunlight. You should be able to hand hold your camera for a moon shot. Mind you, if you get the achieve the correct exposure for the moon then there will be only shadow in the rest of the composition.

 

[skieur]

My memory sucks tonight. Thanks skier for the correction. I went back and looked at a few of mine and shutterspeed was in the 1/60 to 1/250 range and aperature from f/5.6 to f/11 (1.7 TC attached to 300mm f/4)

Awesome photo to boot!

Thanks, Kundalini.

You seem to be one of the few in this thread that is capable of reading.

skieur

 

[astrostu]

You have to use a fast enough shutter speed to freeze the movement of the moon. I know that's a problem if you want to maintain detail in the trees. I think the moon is actually equal to daylight when is comes to exposure, or at least close. That would mean about 1/400 of a sec at f16 and iso 400.

This is only an issue if you are using a very long lens (300mm+) and/or long exposures due to a very small aperture (for which there's no reason to do).

Sounds like a good exercise for HDR. How about some bracketing to favor the moon and recombine images.

People are recommending HDRs here, and I should mention that an HDR to expose the moon and foreground correctly is almost certainly due to failure unless there is nothing but pure air (N_2, O_2, and other light, completely transparent gases). This is because if there's any hint of particulate material, the bright moon will cause a glow around it, and this will render any HDR very odd-looking unless you were to remove that glow.


Here is an excerpt from the lunar eclipse astrophotography guide I wrote a few months ago on how to properly photograph the moon:

This is the most important phase to be able to photograph because it is the one where you (1) set up your equipment, (2) make sure it is working right, (3) determine your basic exposure settings, and (4) focus properly. So go ahead and do 1-2.

Steps 3 and 4 are somewhat iterative - you will need to determine your exposure so that you can focus. Then go back and make sure your exposure is still correct, and then if you have changed it, you will want to verify your focus is still correct.

When determining your exposure settings, remember that the three main things that determine how much light is recorded are (1) shutter speed / exposure length, (2) aperture, and (3) ISO (remember that shutter speed and aperture can be collectively referred to in the EV measurement). First, set your ISO to its lowest setting (this will probably be 100). Second, set your aperture to its largest setting, which is the lowest f/number. Then increase the f/number by 1, 2, or 3 stops (remember, this is based upon a "sweet spot" of sharpness in most lenses). Third, experiment with shutter speed until the Moon is exposed properly. Use your f/number and an EV12 for the full Moon as a starting point. The following table should help:

f/number 1.4 2.0 2.8 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.6 8.0 14.0
Shutter Speed (sec) 1/2000 1/1000 1/500 1/250 1/200 1/160 1/125 1/60 1/20

The above table should only be used as a guide, especially because the Moon's brightness will vary depending upon its position in the sky, atmospheric turbulence, and particles and pollution in the air. For example, with an f/14 aperture on a 900 mm (1440 mm equivalent) lens, an exposure of around 1/120-sec properly exposed the Moon for me just before the last eclipse. That corresponds to EV14.5, and this was when the Moon was near its highest point in the sky (hence Wikipedia's EV15 value). When using a 480 mm equivalent lens at f/5.6, an exposure of around 1/250- to 1/320-sec properly exposed the Moon a few months earlier. If the Moon appears too dark with your shutter speed, then decrease the speed to allow more light in. If the Moon appears all white with your shutter speed, then increase the speed to allow in less light.

This is where using the Histogram feature on your camera helps. The Histogram is a graph telling you where most of the recorded light falls. If the Histogram peaks towards the left side, this means that most of the pixels in the image are dark. If the Histogram peaks towards the right side, then the opposite is true. Ideally, you want it to peak in the middle. But, unless the Moon fills the entire field of view of the image, this will not happen because the night sky will dominate the scene.

Therefore, most of the pixels will be fairly dark, up against the left side of the Histogram. However, there should be a peak in the brighter part of the Histogram (the right side) - this is the Moon. You want that peak to be somewhere in the middle of the Histogram. You do not ever want it to truncate prematurely against either side.

Further explanation of Histograms is not the purpose of this guide. For more information, many people recommend this webpage: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-histograms.shtml .

If you are finding that you need really slow shutter speeds at this point (such as 1/30-sec or longer), then double-check your aperture and make sure that it is mostly open (you are using a small f/number). If you are finding you need really fast shutter speeds (such as 1/300-sec or faster), then double-check the ISO to make sure it is not too high.

To focus, set the manual focus at infinity, or if you have an SLR, then set it as far "past" infinity as you can. Take a picture. Either look at it on the camera's LCD screen (zoomed in), or at the image on a computer. It will probably be out of focus. Now - just a little at a time - change the focus in the other direction, and take another picture. Continue this process until the picture you take is in focus (or in focus enough for your purposes).

For me, this is often the longest part of setting up and it can be a pain. But it is a very necessary step … you would not want to spend 5 hours out in the cold photographing the Moon and come back and look at out-of-focus blobs. You should also be checking the images periodically throughout the night to ensure the focus has not changed due to temperature, focus creep, or accidentally bumping the lens.
Now that the lens is in focus, double-check the exposure Histogram to make sure your exposure settings are still alright, and adjust accordingly if they are not.

Now for the most important part: Write down your settings! These are your baseline settings and you can use them as a starting point for all other lunar photography. And especially if you are doing this a few weeks in advance of an eclipse, you are likely to forget what you did when it comes time for the "big night" and trying to figure out camera settings while the eclipse is going on is not a very fun thing to do. I made a detailed log of all my settings and processing details during the August 2007 eclipse, and I also made notes of what I should have done differently at each stage, and it is this that I will use as a starting point for the next lunar eclipse.

So, to reiterate two points: There is NO REASON to use anything other than ISO 100 unless you're using an aperture of f/12 or higher. And to that end, there is NO REASON to use such a small aperture unless your lens is really screwed up at smaller apertures, in which case it's time for a new lens.

 

[Jedo_03]

'course the moon's bright...
It's reflecting the sun...!!
Jedo

 

[RockDawg]

Wow! So many responses and so much information! I'm sorry I'm late getting back to this thread (it's been a crazy couple days), but I appreciate all the replies. I can't wait to get another chance to try this again.

So basically I was overexposing the moon even when I was underexposing the rest of the scene (in my other dark pics) and the only way to get the complete scene properly exposed is HDR (maybe according to astrostu), otherwise just go for a properly exposed moon?

Boy, every time I think I take one step forward in photography and try to do something else, I end up two steps further back. Oh well, I just keep plugging away at it and hopefully things will start to click one of these days.

 

[saltface]

Try taking a shot of the moon during early sunset using spot metering and bracketing. You'll be amazed at how dark the sky is even when the moon isn't bright at all.

 

[RockDawg]

Good idea. I'll try that. It makes sense if properly exposing the moon results in underexposed foreground then shooting with the foreground in more light might just give me what I'm looking for.

 

[Early]

Originally Posted by Early
You have to use a fast enough shutter speed to freeze the movement of the moon. I know that's a problem if you want to maintain detail in the trees. I think the moon is actually equal to daylight when is comes to exposure, or at least close. That would mean about 1/400 of a sec at f16 and iso 400.

This is only an issue if you are using a very long lens (300mm+) and/or long exposures due to a very small aperture (for which there's no reason to do).

As you can see in the photo, the moon isn't round. That means it moved during exposure. That's the reason for the faster shutter speed. Plus, the moon is overexposed.

 

[Sirashley]

That's no Moon, its a Space Station...

All kidding aside, I had the same problem in some of my photos. I find the replies interesting... I may try a few of the suggestions

 

[RockDawg]

That's no Moon, its a Space Station...

Twister. One of my favorite movies! :thumbup: In fact I'd love to do some storm chasing. Tis the season!

 

[Bevel Heaven]

guys guys guys...........

someone said above you can hand hold your moon shots - yes I agree. The day I got my 300mm f2.8 and unwrapped it, twisted it onto my D300 and walked outside aimed at the moon and went click and was amazed.

The photo above, the MAIN thing as I see it is that the moon is out of focus. That is a big blur problem and one that noone suggested as the culprit. seems the focus is on the trees or somewhere close.

Fast shudder speed is essential for many reasons, the biggest is that simply put, that moon is moving across the sky at a crazy fast speed...

you can;t use matrix you MUST use spot metering directly on the moon and a high f number, manual focus set to infinity [some lens will focus beyond infinity]

 

[uplander]

Spot metering is the answer here and Exposure bracketing works wonders too.
I combine the two and take a lot of shots variing things and see what i come up with after downloading and looking. The exif info is a blessing to learning how to do these shots. Here is a shot of the moon ( cropped)

Moon

 

[astrostu]

As you can see in the photo, the moon isn't round. That means it moved during exposure. That's the reason for the faster shutter speed. Plus, the moon is overexposed.

Sure looks round to me. There might be a slight blob around the 10-11:00 position, but I interpreted that as a branch overlapping the moon and so giving the illusion of a slight ellipsoid.

You can easily calculate how long it takes the moon to more more than one pixel give the dimensions of your CCD (in pixels) and the focal length of your lens. If the original poster was using, say, a 100 mm lens and the detector was 3000 px across, then it would take the moon a little over 1 second to move 1 full pixel. However, the image that was posted was 1024 px across, and it would have taken the moon about 3.5 seconds to move 1 pixel. Double that and you might start to see a blur. And I don't think that photo was more than 7 seconds long.

And yes, the moon is overexposed in the photo. So the shutter speed should be shorter. I still maintain there's no reason to use tiny apertures nor high ISOs, just use a shorter shutter speed.

 

[Helen B]

...

The photo above, the MAIN thing as I see it is that the moon is out of focus. That is a big blur problem and one that noone suggested as the culprit. seems the focus is on the trees or somewhere close.

The main reason for the blurred appearance of the moon in the original image is the degree of overexposure of the moon itself (a brightly sunlit surface, as has already been pointed out) and the scattered light around it.

Best,
Helen

 

[RebelTasha]

Spot metering is the answer here and Exposure bracketing works wonders too.
I combine the two and take a lot of shots variing things and see what i come up with after downloading and looking. The exif info is a blessing to learning how to do these shots. Here is a shot of the moon ( cropped)

Moon

I can't see the Exif data..

I'm going to look up HDR too as it was referred to a lot in this thread and I don't know what it stand for..