You have a great idea here. Forgive me for not remembering where I read it, but for moon shots, with 400 film the exposure time is somewhere around 3 to 4 seconds. If stars are in the shot, they can drift after about two seconds.
I love how you captured the clouds. The one on my page was exposed for 4 seconds using fuji 400 slide.I didnt get as much cloud light or moon detail.Keep looking UP.
Glad to help Dave, probably best to bracket a roll of shots to get that nice crisp moon shot,, I was just looking through paul Groffs folio, and he has some nice ones, he might give us a hinst as to what shutter speeds he used, but Im sure it was around 125th at F8 or F11 with 100 iso I have a roll of them in my negative files, that I could use for sandwiching negs together
Actually, Marty, I am grateful that you did jump in, since I didn't have any idea how long a moon exposure should be. I knew I had been overexposing a lot, but I didn't think by a log factor. Your further comments are timely as well. The simplest solution would be two exposures, later spliced together electronically.
On re-reading my comment, what I said was that I didn't think celestial motion was rapid enough to show a noticeable movement of the moon in ten seconds. Evidently it is. We are really moving!
Dear DC Hi, so glad you dropped me a note, and those comments were not so much for yuo, but for someone eles that commented, and said something about a 10 second exposure not seeming like enough, so thought Id jump in and explain moon exposure, as I had done some long ago, the trouble your going to run into is with that quick exposure, you will indeed get a sharp detailed moon, but your not going to get those awsome looking clouds, thats one thing your long exposure is picking up...a quandry indeed, so how to get this same photo with a sharp moon?? Im not sure you can, would have to be double exposed,, or the sharp moon photoshopped in, but I do love what you have done, many nights Iv seen that same scene, and wondered how to pull it off,
0 
