How Do You Take a Picture of the Moon??

What exposures would you use to take a pic of the moon?

You can't exactly take an incident light reading, can you!

I suppose spot-metering would be the answer, but when i used my Canon T70
in partial meter mode, with a telescopic lens, it turned out horrible. I'm not
sure if it was underexposed, because the moon was very bright, and the black
sky was "corrected" by the processing machine to turn into a brown.

I suppose that perhaps my telescopic lens wasn't big enough to get the
moon to fill in a significant percentage of the frame to make a meaningful
exposure measurement, but when you are in partial mode with the T70, only the
center circle is measured.

How do you do this? I suspect a reflected reading with my Luna-Pro be
meaningless (no spot attachment)?


Slick

 

That will always happen unless you go to a good processor who will do
"straight pints." The printing machines that do automatic exposure will
destroy any good exposure you've made. You could shoot slides and not
have that problem.

The Luna-Pro should be the perfect exposure meter for Lunar photography!
Just kidding.

This site explains it all:
http://www.u-net.com/ph/mas/observe/lunar-p/lunar-p.htm

 

Not without some expensive transportation, you can't.

The good news is you don't really need to. You could take an incident light
reading here on earth in bright sunlight, which should be close to what
you'd get on the moon. (It's the same sunlight, and it's never cloudy on the
moon.)

Most likely the moon was way overexposed, not underexposed.

Use a normal exposure for direct sunlight here on earth, e.g. the "f/16
rule" (f/16 at the reciprocal of the shutter speed, or its equivalent) and
bracket a little. Of course NO meter reading will call that exposure
correct, unless you have a long enough lens to fill the frame with the moon,
which is pretty unlikely. The camera's metering system will be reading all
that blackness around the moon and trying to work that into a correct
exposure, which would be impossible.

Getting a decent print made will be the problem. As your experience
indicates, the automated processing screws up the results, and it can be
depended upon to do so. Maybe you can find an operator who can make a
straight, not "corrected" print from the negative. Alternatively, you could
shoot slides, which won't have that problem. You can later have prints made
from the slides, and such prints are usually very faithful to the originals.

Neil

 

Oops. That should be "f/16 at the reciprocal of the ISO number," of course.
For 200 ISO film, f/16 at something close to 1/200, or f/11 at around 1/400,
f/8 at around 1/800, etc. etc.

Neil

 

Exposure is the same as anyone in bright sunlight. So "sunny-16" and
reciprocals are the speeds to shoot. eg: for ISO 100 film f/16 and
1/125 is just fine... I'd do it at [f/8 x 1/400 or 1/500] or [f11 x
1/200 or 1/250] at the sharper FL's of the lens.

Tripod, release cable and if so equipped, mirror lockup.

Even with a 600mm lens, the moon only takes up a small part of the frame.

If you have telescope, then just figure the exposure from the sunny-16
rule. For every stop slower the lens, increase a stop of speed (double it).

Alan.

 

Slick, the exposures are not that difficult to come by for
either lunar or solar photography.
When doing this photography, a good number to remember is
009.
Multiply .009 by the effective focal length of the lens and
you will know the diameter of the moon or sun at the film plane.
My 60" lens gives me a .56" dia. image which is decent size on
a piece of 35 mm film. This is for direct projection and one of the
neater ways of doing this. Any other lens you put between the
objective and the film plane will give you a new effective focal
length to work with.

Good Luck,

Ken

 

(Radio913) wrote in

As some have said, the "sunny-16" rule is the most often recommended.
However, a lot of astro photographers prefer the "moony-11" rule, one stop
brighter, because the moon doesn't always look that good as 18% grey, even
though it might be 'accurate' for the composition of the moon rock. People
see the moon as a bright thing in the sky, they like to see it bright in
photos.

Also, either of these rules apply *only* for a full moon, near
zenith, on a clear night. Half-moon, use f8 to f11, I'd suggest f8.
Remember, only half of that spherical surface is illuminated now. Crescents
tend to go down to f4 or lower, again, at zenith. A full harvest moon just
risen won't even expose properly at f4. So now you're talking longer
exposure times to accomodate whatever lens you're using, and hoping that
the movement doesn't show up too much.

High humidity, or the lower it is on the horizon, the more the
exposure drops (oblique angle through more of the atmosphere).

And yes, the processors will screw it up. Keep taking it back until
they get it right - any idiot examining the negatives as they print it
should be able to guess what you're after.

While full moons look fabulous, many of the phases show much better
detail from the oblique angle of the sun. If you're using a loooong focal
length (1000mm or better) or a telescope, you'll probably get much more
detailed pics at a half to gibbous moon, provided your shutter speed
doesn't allow movement to show. Tracking motors are wonderful things.

While you're at it, try facing *away* from the moon and shooting some
moonlit landscapes. Can be really cool looking. Full moonlight should pull
about 1 minute at f8 for 400 speed film, but films differ in responsiveness
so bracket widely. Also, be sneaky and do a double exposure - one proper
exposure for the moon high in the sky, placed precisely in an upper
corenr of the frame, then a second, much longer exposure while aimed at a
scenic landscape illuminated by the moon. You could never accomplish good
lighting for both in one exposure, but done properly, the end effect should
be great. Be careful to keep the moon in an open area of the sky for the
second exposure, with no stars, trees, or streetlights, or you'll give it
away.

Have fun!


- Al.

 

I always wondered (perhaps I should have posted a new thread), about
slide-being-not-tempered-with by the processing machine thing. Won't
having the negatives scanned achieve the same objective?

->HS

 

With ISO 100 film bracket around f11 (f8, f11, f16) at 1/100th second. If
there is any chance there is haze in the upper atmosphere go down to f5.6.
These are for full moon. With less than full add a stop or two of exposure.
Fall and spring are about the best times to get moon shots are there is
little haze and the moon is fairly high in the sky. It is higher and there
is usually no haze in winter but it gets awfully cold. Summer is hazy and
the sun is low in the sky.
you will have to ask the lab to print the sky as black or they will make
you a greyed out mess trying to average the exposure.
If you use slide film add extra shots to the bracket - f9.5, and f13 to
be sure you get a good one. Film is cheap, time is priceless.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
New email - Contact on the Menyou page.

 

I have to disagree with you on this one. First, when photographing the
moon, without special equipment, all you are going to photograph is the part
that is sun lit. You will not get a reasonable exposure on the rest of the
moon and the fact that only part of it is exposed, does not in anyway make
that part that is exposed any less bright.

While there is some value in the issue about low on the horizon, the
effect is small enough to ignore in this case. It is about equal to the
difference in total light in the morning and at noon. Sunny 16 rule really
covers both.

 

What? The exposure for the moon is the same as for anything lit by the
sun: 1/ISO @ f/16 or so. This is the 'sunny 16' rule.

 

True, if you later find a good processor or scan them yourself.
The advantage of slides is that they can be projected and enjoyed if
you're set up for it.

 

Not in my experience. When low on the horizon the moon is in haze no matter
what time of year. At least here in the polluted US of A. Even doing a
summer full moon at zenith takes more exposure than in winter as the moon is
not as high in the sky and there is again more haze. I should point out that
in North Carolina the moon will sometimes stay yellow (an indication of
stuff in the air) for 4 hours after it rises during the warm months.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
New email - Contact on the Menyou page.

 

You just have to try it and see. In theory it sounds fine, but this
is not a flat piece of paper that is either partially or entirely within
the camera's field of view. It's a sphere, lit from a source of varying
degrees away from directly perpendicular to your viewing area.

There's two things at work here. First, when the moon is full, the
light is hitting it more or less directly, from behind you. A good
percentage of the surface can be reflecting back to you.

At half moon, the light is coming directly from the side, and
'ricocheting' towards you - the area that gives a 'direct' reflection is a
crescent, a little more than halfway between the terminator and the bright
outer edge. It's a significantly smaller area to reflect, and will be
darker.

Moreover, since the surface has quite a bit of texture, the indirect
light is throwing a lot of shadows, further reducing the area reflecting
light towards Earth. The listed sources below suggest an even greater
variance than I originally posted.

http://home.hiwaay.net/~krcool/Astro/moon/howtophoto/

http://www.photo.net/nature/sunmoon

http://www.calphoto.com/moon.htm

http://www.u-net.com/ph/mas/observe/lunar-p/lunar-p.htm

The issue of height above the horizon depends very heavily on
humidity in the air. The difference can be huge. Shoot a harvest moon at
sunny-16 and see if you get anything usable. In fact, shoot the clearest
moon you can find (any phase from full towards waning, so the sky is
properly dark) one hour after it rises, then six hours, at the same
exposure and see the difference.

Oh yeah, I should also list a great source for times and phases and
such, which is http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/


- Al.

 

What what you suggest is true, your conclusion about exposure is not.
The moon has light and shadow. This is true at any phase of the moon. The
light is full sun, always, the shadow is much deaper shadow than on earth
and is almost uniform becaue unlike earth the moon does not had a sky to
provide shadow ilumination, only star light and sometimes earth light along
with some light reflected from other moon features. The end result is very
little light in the shadows, too little to record with common photographic
techniques.

There are two item in play here. Both true. First early in the evening
you are getting not just the moon, but also the twilight glow. Difficult to
expose, (bracking works well) but worth the effort in my view. Second, as
you suggest is an increased filtering effect from the atmosphere which I
commented on "While there is some value in the issue about low on the
horizon, the
effect is small enough to ignore in this case. It is about equal to the
difference in total light in the morning and at noon." I should have noted
that it is about equal to the difference ON EARTH .." There are times that
it is greater than normal, but considering the subject, those differences
are not common, but do happen.

 

Not true. All minilabs have automatic exposure. To get good prints from a
scene with anything outside of a normal density, either light or dark, you
need to go to a place that will correct your images when they don't look
right to the operator. There is no such thing as "straight printing". If
you get a good print that is mostly black or white the operator has stepped
in and made adjustments to the print. Places with a high volume of printing
may not make any corrections but if you take your film and prints back to
them and explain what it should look like they should reprint them for free.

That will always happen unless you go to a good processor who will do
"straight pints." The printing machines that do automatic exposure will
destroy any good exposure you've made. You could shoot slides and not
have that problem.

 

I shot some pics of the moon last night with 400 speed color neg film... It
was a crystal clear night but I still bracketed my shots using 1/400 at both
f16 and f11... Ya never know for sure...
Denny

 

It gets cloudy on earth though, and a thin veil of cloud between you and the
moon can take away a surprising amount of light.
So unless it's an absolutely clear night, bracketing a stop towards
overexposure is recommended.

 

Just go out and makes some moon pictures witha 12 exposure roll of film,
first with the sunny16 rule, and then bracketed exposures and run em down
to the one hour photo shop.. Then folks will know for themselves... That
they will retain a lot longer than what we say here...
Denny - Televue Genesis

 

First you make a speech that includes the words "We do these things not
because they are easy, but because they are hard"...


Peter