Showing posts with label moon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label moon. Show all posts

Sunday, May 6, 2012

How do I digitally post process Moon photos?

Question

I've created a few photos of the Moon using a Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope and a DSLR. I've tried different ISO settings, shutter speed, bracketing to find the best settings.

Here I show a (reduced size) example photo (ISO 200, 1/250 sec, digital processing: +2.5 EV)

Moon

Here is a smaller part of the Moon: alt text

What is the best way to digitally postprocess the images? I've read several articles mentioning noise reduction and image stacking but without any details. For instance there are several noise reduction techniques, which one is the best here? How many photos should be taken for image stacking? Is it the best to take the photos with the same settings...

Asked by asalamon74

Answer

I would read this article for information on stacking and how to properly stack photos: http://www.naturescapes.net/docs/index.php/category-technical/145-long-exposure-astrophotography. The relevant information is farther down in the article.

Looking at your shot, it appears that there is a fair amount blur, I'm guessing due to incorrect auto-tracking? Before doing any stacking, since this is the moon, and exposing the moon is a LOT easier than exposing stars...I would make sure your auto-tracking is correct. Its difficult to do, but once you have your mount set properly, you should be able to get MUCH sharper photos with a lower ISO setting, an not need to do any stacking.

If you are interested in photographing the sky or stars, then stacking is a much more useful tool, as getting a good, clear, bright exposure with low ISO of the sky requires either one very long exposure, or several long exposures stacked. Stacking definitely helps manage noise.

For more on Astrophotography, see this post: How do I get started in Astrophotography?

Answered by jrista

Monday, December 26, 2011

Can I combine two photos to get a good image of a non-full moon?

Question

Is there a good combo of longer exposure and shorter exposure that I can use to get two photos of the moon that I can then combine to show the sun-lit side and the earth-lit side together so I have one disk?

What software post production will I have to do to reduce the glare on the earth lit side that comes from the sunlit side etc?

(I am using Aperture 3 and a Nikon D90.)

Answer

First, I recommend you take a look at my answer to another question about photographing the moon here:

Best Settings for Nighttime Moon Photos

As for your specific question, it would probably be fairly difficult to get two shots that you could merge together without a tracking mount. As such, my first recommendation is to either buy an equatorial tracking mount, or if you have a friend who has one, see if you can borrow it. With a tracking mount, you should be able to get the necessary exposures at low ISO without any blur from the motion of the moon, which should result in a decent combination.

If you do not have access to a tracking mount, the best I can say is use the chart from my other answer linked above, and try to keep your exposure times as minimal as possible. A camera with very good high-ISO performance will make it easier to get a shot of earthglow with a short exposure, without losing too much detail. You might want to use ISO 3200 if you have it. Noise is a real moon detail killer, since your signal-to-noise ratio is pretty low to start with. Using higher ISO's and keeping exposure time faster than 1/15th of a second should do it, but you will experience some problems with noise.

Monday, December 12, 2011

How to capture detail of craters on the moon?

Question

How can I photograph the moon so that I see detail of the craters and mountains?

I have a Canon EOS 550D (T2i) and tried "No Flash", "P" as well as creative auto mode, but to no avail. Every time I get a completely white moon.

Moon Shot

Answer

I had exactly the same problem when I first tried to photograph the moon: all I ever got was an overexposed white circle.

The answer is that the moon is much brighter than you realise. Also, unless you have a very telescopic lens, it's going to be pretty small in your photo. If you use one of the camera's automatic modes, the camera will try to get the "right" exposure for a scene made up of lots of black sky and a tiny bit of moon. The "lots of black sky" wins out, the camera brightens the exposure, and you lose the detail in the moon.

The best way to capture the moon is therefore to use Manual mode. This isn't as difficult as it sounds:

  1. Switch the mode dial to M.
  2. Set the ISO setting to something quite low: between 100 and 400 should do it.
  3. Set your aperture setting to somewhere round f/5.6.
  4. Set your shutter speed to around 1/100s.

Now try a shot and see how it looks. If it's too bright, keep reducing the shutter speed until you start to see the detail of the craters. If you've somehow under-exposed it, just do the opposite: try a slower shutter speed, a smaller aperture or a lower ISO setting.

The main thing is ignore what the camera is telling you! It'll be flashing away like crazy saying your shot is going to be too dark, but just ignore it. We know the sky will be "too dark", but it's the moon we're after. Fold away your targeting computer, Luke. Use the Force.

Good luck!

Monday, September 12, 2011

Best settings for nighttime moon photos?

Question

All my attempts to get a good shot of the full moon with my DSLR result in an overexposed circle on a black background. I've used a tripod, remote shutter release, low ISO and long exposure but nothing has worked so far.

Is there some magical combination of ISO and exposure time that will produce good results? I particularly want to catch a full moon with the reddish effect when it is close to the horizon.

Answer

The moon can be a tricky subject. It is a very bright subject compared to the rest of the night sky. It is also a moving subject, and it moves just fast enough that it can be problematic. Its luminosity changes depending on the time of the month. If you wish to capture any other elements in a scene with the moon, exposure can become fairly complicated.

alt text

The above shot was taken this past November 8th, at about 7pm...a fairly new moon. It was shot with a Canon EOS 450D using the Canon EF 100-400mm L series lens @ 400mm, f/7.1 and ISO 800 for 1/2 of a second. That exposure time was necessary to expose the clouds enough to create a silhouette of the foreground treetops, and not overexpose the moon itself. It was a fairly tricky shot, and in the end part of the crescent did get a little over exposed.

Determining which settings to use boiled down to a maybe two things. What I wanted to compose my scene with, and how much time I had to take the shot. At 400mm, the motion of the moon across the sky is heightened quite a bit, and at most you have about 0.8-1 second before that motion blurs detail. I wanted to expose long enough that the clouds obscuring the moon were bright enough to show silhouettes of the tree tops. I also wanted to get some earthshine on the dark part (a desire that was really pushing it...and, I ended up choosing an exposure that was a bit too high in this case, as 1/4-1/6th of a second would have probably been better, or perhaps ISO 400 rather than ISO 800.)

There is no single correct set of exposure settings that will always expose the moon correctly. Its luminosity depends on a couple factors, primarily its phase, its position in the sky, and what exactly you want to expose (i.e. just the moon, or the moon with some earthshine.) Here is a table of base exposure for digital cameras, assuming an aperture of f/8, based on some of my experience (note that the difference between each phase is not exactly one stop, the scale tends to get skewed a bit as you reach full moon):

Base Aperture: f/8ISO  | Crescent | Quarter | Gibbous | Full Moon |
-------------------------------------------------
100  |    1/2   |   1/4   |   1/10  |    1/20   |
200  |    1/4   |   1/8   |   1/20  |    1/40   |
400  |    1/8   |   1/15  |   1/40  |    1/80   |
800  |    1/15  |   1/30  |   1/80  |    1/160  |
1600 |    1/30  |   1/60  |   1/160 |    1/300  |

From that table, it is easy enough to make extrapolations for special scenarios. If you want some earthshine, you will want to expose for longer. I would say that getting even a hint of earthshine requires an exposure around 0.8-1 second. This often blows out the lit part of the moon, so its only really viable with a crescent.

If you want to capture any foreground details, you will usually also want an exposure time of around 1s for silhouettes, or longer for anything else (usually, you will want a double-exposure...one for the moon, one for the foreground.)

Blue moons, orange moons in crescent hung just above the horizon, etc. will all be dimmer than a white moon in the middle of the sky. Slightly longer exposures, maybe by a stop or two, will be necessary to compensate. When it comes to exposing the full moon, however, the reverse tends to be true...shorter exposures by up to a stop may be necessary.

To capture the full moon with that orange glow near the horizon, you will probably want to use the following:

ISO 200, f/8, 1/40-1/50s

Compensate as necessary for any other compositional factors.


UPDATE:

I've recently been photographing the moon a lot. Having taken numerous shots of the moon, in its crescent, half, gibbous, and full phases, during eclipses and perigee, I think it is important to make a significant note:

The moon does not follow any specific pattern, and there are, in the end, few rules that you can follow to take a good exposure. The table above is a good baseline, and can work as a starting point, however as you expand your efforts and target more dramatic moonscapes, exposing the moon is much like exposing anything else: You need to get a feel for it.

Below is a link to a small video I've been working on, a composition of some of my moon photographs and time-lapse videos taken over the last six months:

Moonscape