moon photography

[Dave Humphries]

Try photographing the moon at the start of its rise, it is closest to the earth at this point.

I think the earth's atmosphere can have a magnifying effect at low elevations (i.e. when moon is just rising or setting), which makes it appear bigger.

However, depending on what is just below the slice of atmosphere between the observation point and where the light enters the atmosphere can have a significant effect on image quality achievable.

If you're looking across a city, you'll have light, smog and heat pollution to cope with, so it'll be low contrast and wobbling
If you're looking across hot land or a warm sea mass, there could well be thermal disruption alone.
So I guess somewhere out in the middle of nowhere and that is cold, is best, but not Iceland at the moment

[Steaphany]

Here is a handy tool to add to your Lunar Photography bag of tricks:

Lunar Perigee and Apogee Calculator

and the next Perigee will be May 20 at 8:40 UTC and just 369728 km center to center

[Steaphany]

I think the earth's atmosphere can have a magnifying effect at low elevations (i.e. when moon is just rising or setting), which makes it appear bigger.

Dave, you are right. I have also read separate accounts where the Moon's apparent size difference is psychological where the brain interprets a larger Moon when objects on the ground are visually close. When the Moon is high in the sky, those size cues no longer contribute.

[rick55]

FWIW, it is psychological, not optical. The moon is actually smaller at the horizon, because of refraction, and because of parallax: with the moon on the horizon, it's about one earth radius farther away, which is 1-2% of the distance to the moon. In navigating by stars, you account for the refraction. When using the moon, you also have to make a correction for parallax. Size cues are one hypothesis. There's at least one study that shows that "apparent distance" contributes: the moon on the horizon is at the back of a whole series of objects on the horizon, so the eye sees that it's far away, and yet large. When away from the horizon, there are no distance cues.

Cheers,
Rick

[kevinf]

He might be referring to the magnification effect of the atmosphere close to the horizon.

[rick55]

Hi, Kevin;

Good catch, I wrote that pretty badly. The apparent disk of the moon, as measured by an optical instrument, is smaller at the horizon for two reasons. One is the parallax, the other is refraction. Instead of magnifying the moon, refraction caused by atmosphere reduces the apparent size. This might be a fun subject to play with with a camera.

Cheers,
Rick

[Shadowman]

Jonathan,

The moon's proximity to the earth does change, it is not a consistent distance.

No its not. Its in orbit, so stays roughly the same distance away. The orbit is elliptical, so the distance varies over time, but bears no relation to rising and setting.

[Rodders]

For best results, always try to photograph the moon when it is at its highest in the sky (if its detail on the surface you are trying to capture). At this point, you are looking through the least amount of atmosphere. Our atmosphere does NOT magnify the moon (or sun for that matter). When these objects are close to the horizon, they can get distorted by our atmosphere which can create a "squashed effect".

The moon is in a (approx) 28 day elliptical orbit around the earth, from rise to set each day the earth - moon distance only slightly changes and because of this, you will not even notice a difference in its apparent size.

At the end of the day, its a fun and tricky target for the camera. Below is a shot I did about a year ago with the camera attached to a 600mm refractor telescope/lens.

[kevinf]

Nice shot Rodders

[Shadowman]

Steaphany,

Great link. As the link concludes, the eye may not be able to tell the difference but a telescope or telephoto lens can capture differences in lunar distances.

Here is a handy tool to add to your Lunar Photography bag of tricks:

Lunar Perigee and Apogee Calculator

and the next Perigee will be May 20 at 8:40 UTC and just 369728 km center to center

[dragonaxe]

given that it's a long exposure, would using a mirror-up function improve anything?

[Steaphany]

The latest, July 2010, issue of Astronomy magazine:

Has a nice article "Observe 10 Hot Lunar Targets". The author, Michael E. Bakich, says he used a 60mm Ø telescope for years to view these and other easy to spot lunar features.

[belong]

this is my latest moon photography...
please have a comment on how to improve...

[Shadowman]

Isabelo,

Your photo looks very good, lots of detail.

[danattherock]

Very interesting thread and I enjoyed reading it. I have only got one image of the moon, but would love to learn more about how to do it properly. Interesting to read that some folks prefer shooting at times other than full moon. Guess that is the greenhorn in me as I found that counter intuitive. Opens up lots of opportunity. I have many more days now to try it. Ha ha...

[Shadowman]

Welcome to the group. I think the reason why some of photograph images other than the full moon is because we have such a short time to capture it and we use the rest of the month to try and perfect our skills.

Very interesting thread and I enjoyed reading it. I have only got one image of the moon, but would love to learn more about how to do it properly. Interesting to read that some folks prefer shooting at times other than full moon. Guess that is the greenhorn in me as I found that counter intuitive. Opens up lots of opportunity. I have many more days now to try it. Ha ha...

[Dave Humphries]

~ Interesting to read that some folks prefer shooting at times other than full moon.

Hi Dan,

The main reason is that the full moon is frontally lit (from our viewing point) with little edge lit stuff to give craters any feeling depth, except of course at one edge or the other. You can see this effect on the left hand side of your shot.

Now compare some of the more central features with how they appear in the other members images above and see how the lighting angle affects what we see - maximum 'depth effect' (i.e. shadows) is only visible at the edge of the sun's illumination. I thin portion in any single image, so full moon shooting isn't wrong, it just may not give the maximum impact and, as Shadowman says, it is far rarer (1:28 vs 13:28 roughly - I think)

Cheers,

[Steaphany]

I just read this article and thought it worthy of adding to this thread:

Impact Observed in Jupiter's Atmosphere

The article focuses on Jupiter, not the Moon, but the relevance is it exemplifies both amatuer astronomy and a dedication to conducting consistent observations. As I mentioned before, the Moon can display various Transient lunar phenomena and like Anthony Wesley who whitnessed and captured a second 'once-in-a-lifetime' event less than a year his first, Lunar photography can provide unexpected surprises.

The trick is having your shutter open when something happens.

[Steaphany]

For those following this thread and who are located in central or western North America, here is something you may want to shoot, tomorrow morning's partial lunar eclipse !

Weather permitting, I'll be ready.

Here's the details:

StarDate Magazine - Lunar Eclipse Graces Sky Saturday, June 26, 2010

NASA - Partial Lunar Eclipse of June 26

Astronomy Magazine - View a partial lunar eclipse
Watch as part of the Moon disappears from view June 26.

UPDATE: Finally getting through my email backlog, I found this article on NASA News:

Big Lunar Eclipse

and they include some nice graphics of the event:



and where the eclipse can best be seen:



Being in Texas, my view will be borderline, but for any in Hawaii, New Zealand, or Australia, you'll have a front row seat.

[Steaphany]

My Eclipse post is here: Heads up - Partial luna eclipse, June 26th (NZ, Eastern Australia and South Pacific)