Capturing moon and clouds

moze229 · Jul 3, 2009

Hello. I'm relatively new to photography, and I'd say I understand just enough about my camera and how lenses work to screw a picture up.

I'd like to know how in the world one gets a shot of the moon and the clouds in one shot.

I have a Rebel XTi and I'd be using a Sigma 70-300MM to take the shot. In the past, I've got some really good moon shots, but can't get the clouds. If I slow the shutter speed to catch the clouds, the moon is too bright. Do I need to take two shots with different settings and then combine the two?

Matt

Samanax · Jul 3, 2009

You may have to use a ND (neutral density) filter to allow for a longer shutter speed to capture the clouds. Really not sure if this will work though...never tried it.

kundalini · Jul 3, 2009

Hello and Welcome to TPF from another Tarheel (and fan). I live just outside of Raleigh.

moze229 said:
Do I need to take two shots with different settings and then combine the two?

That's probably the easiest way. I tried some the other night but was not happy with the results.

Sometimes you get lucky though. I took this one as the very orange moon was rising just above the treeline and dark clouds were coming in. Within seconds there was no shot. I thought it was funny.

Josh66 · Jul 3, 2009

I've been trying to get a similar shot as well. This is my best so far.

Not as good as I had hoped, but it's the general idea I was going for.
I just wish more of the sky was lit up.

moze229 · Jul 3, 2009

Thanks for the suggestions. So, I guess it wasn't just me then

Well, I guess what I'll try is taking the moon shot - then changing the camera settings real quick and taking another shot with settings for the clouds. I'll go into Elements, take the moon out of the second shot, then combine the two shots together and see what I come up with. However, just taking the moon out of the second shot may still leave too much ambient light and it might look a little strange. I'll try it again tonight if I can.

KmH · Jul 3, 2009

The huge difference in luminosity is to great to get both in one image.

You'll have to make 2 images and combine them in post process.

beatlesusan · Jul 3, 2009

It's super hard. I've enjoyed these tips too. I took some the other night. They were meh. I'm sure it'd help if I had a tripod, which I'm hopefully getting today.

moze229 · Jul 3, 2009

beatlesusan said:
It's super hard. I've enjoyed these tips too. I took some the other night. They were meh. I'm sure it'd help if I had a tripod, which I'm hopefully getting today.

Those are pretty good! That's kinda what I'm shooting for, but as you call them "meh", I know what you mean. There is just no "oomph" behind it like there is when you look at it. Here is one I got of the moon with my telephoto and tripod. Not too bad for a "meh" lens

Didn't get the clouds though - yes, there were clouds there.

I'm going to try again soon. This picture was more or less just trying to get a feel for the lens.

Matt

03civicdx · Jul 3, 2009

I guess the moon and clouds in NC have been interesting to a few people the past few nights huh.... Welcome from NC here to (winston salem) i took a few last night but havn't looked at them yet.

moze229 · Jul 3, 2009

03civicdx said:
I guess the moon and clouds in NC have been interesting to a few people the past few nights huh.... Welcome from NC here to (winston salem) i took a few last night but havn't looked at them yet.

It appears that way. Actually, this is just something I've been trying to do for some time, and I'm just now getting around to asking about it.

Matt

KmH · Jul 3, 2009

Good exposure on the Moon, Matt. It's to bad the detail gets so flat when it's full (no shadows).

All you need now is an exposure of some clouds.

beatlesusan · Jul 3, 2009

moze229 said:
beatlesusan said:

It's super hard. I've enjoyed these tips too. I took some the other night. They were meh. I'm sure it'd help if I had a tripod, which I'm hopefully getting today.

Click to expand...

Those are pretty good! That's kinda what I'm shooting for, but as you call them "meh", I know what you mean. There is just no "oomph" behind it like there is when you look at it. Here is one I got of the moon with my telephoto and tripod. Not too bad for a "meh" lens Didn't get the clouds though - yes, there were clouds there.

I'm going to try again soon. This picture was more or less just trying to get a feel for the lens.

Matt

I far from a professional, but I find this to be absolutely gorgeous!!

moze229 · Jul 3, 2009

Sometimes you get lucky though. I took this one as the very orange moon was rising just above the treeline and dark clouds were coming in. Within seconds there was no shot. I thought it was funny.

Sorry I missed your post earlier. That's a neat one - seconds before the clouds got there and the moon set. That ended up looking like the default Halloween picture

Matt

moze229 · Jul 3, 2009

KmH said:
Good exposure on the Moon, Matt. It's to bad the detail gets so flat when it's full (no shadows).

All you need now is an exposure of some clouds.

Flat indeed. The clouds would definitely add character to the picture. Actually, I personally think the moon shots are a little boring without something else in them. Most of the moon shots that aren't full look much better. As I stated though, this was just me trying to get a feel for what I was in for. I actually had to look up some tips the first time I ever did this because I was going way too high on the exposure. The moon doesn't seem that bright until you get it into a shot on the camera. I overexposed a few before I figured things out. The camera settings were a little surprising to the unexpected.

Matt

astrostu · Jul 4, 2009

Two separate exposures, combined later. This was a case where I purposely kept the detail to a minimum on the moon so that the final composite looks more natural ... if you look closely (or at the original as opposed to this smaller version) then you will see some of the lunar mare and that the moon is not completely saturated.