|
|
Mitra Nademi-Nassari
{K:28234} 3/1/2010
|
Great shot(s) and photo!
|
|
|
|
|
Golboo Fiuzy
{K:2359} 6/21/2006
|
Could you please let me to use this image of yours as a night photography sample?
|
|
|
|
Mary Brown
{K:71879} 4/28/2006
|
This is a great display depicting the eclipse. Great shots. Congratulations on BIP and POD.
MAry
|
|
|
|
tom rumland
{K:14874} 10/22/2004
|
ryan, cool! unfortunately, i'll be in california on the 27th. will it be visible on the west coast? i assume not since it'll be 6:15pm PDT and moonrise won't be until 9 or so. is that right? i would really love to shoot this event again. in any case, good luck! at least i'll have your shots to look at ;^)
take care,
tom
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan Greene
{K:3297} 10/18/2004
|
Hi Tom. I commented on this photo a while back, and stumbled on it again just now. I wanted to tell you (in case you don't already know), there is a lunar eclipse on the 27th of October. I think the umbral phase begins about 9:15. I'm going to attempt my first multiple exposure, wish me luck!
|
|
|
|
|
Stefan Engström
{K:24473} 9/3/2004
|
Yes, that does make sense... Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
tom rumland
{K:14874} 9/3/2004
|
stefan, thanks! sorry about that miscommunication on my part. what i meant was that if shooting wide open (f/4.5) i couldn't speed up the shutter enough to get the underexposure i wanted. so i moved down to f/11 to have some shutter speed wiggle room and that did the trick. hope that makes more sense. however, i tell you what, i'll be taking notes next time i shoot the moon ;^)
take care & thanks again,
tom
|
|
|
|
|
Stefan Engström
{K:24473} 9/3/2004
|
Hi Tom - congrats on the POD! Your statement about getting longer shutter times when you stopped down the aperture to get less exposure makes little sense to me. Wouldn't it be beneficial to need less exposure and just reduce the time the shutter is open and therefore reduce motion blur etc. The full moon is actually a pretty bright object and if you are going for detail on the surface (and have a long enough lens) I don't think that shutter speed is normally a problem... Anyway - I like the shot better with just three images. The knee-jerk reaction is to document the entire sequence, but this presents something that is ultimately more interesting (to me).
|
|
|
|
|
tom rumland
{K:14874} 9/3/2004
|
ryan, thanks! glad you liked it. actually that was my original intent. to place them in order. but (i dont rememebr why) it didn't work out very well so i settled for this compromise. not exactly correct, but it kinda fits ;^)
take care,
tom
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan Greene
{K:3297} 9/3/2004
|
Hi Tom, the eclipsed moon on the left is very beautiful. Nice work! I took pictures of the 11/2003 eclpise, but they didn't turn out all that well. I might like this picture better if it were in order chronologically. Maybe like: full moon, 1/4 eclipsed, 1/2 eclipsed, 3/4 eclipsed, totality, and then in reverse.
|
|
|
|
|
Raamses Ortiz
{K:4408} 8/9/2004
|
Hi Tom,
First congratualtions in wining the BIP. This is a most excellent eclipse series you deserve it!!
congrats,
Be seeing you...
Raamses.
|
|
|
|
|
Amna Al Shamsi
{K:21795} 8/4/2004
|
Wonderful capture. Congrats for PTOD award
|
|
|
|
|
ken krishnan
{K:19102} 8/4/2004
|
Wonderful presentation Tom. The diogonal moon placement makes it dynamic as if the moon is in real motion and at any time will disappear from the third frame !
Congradultion on PTOD award. Well deserved.
Regards,
ken
|
|
|
|
Roberto Arcari Farinetti
{K:209486} 8/4/2004
|
Hi Tom...
first my best congrast for the main, is incredible,
second time the photo is fantastic for many words!
the great capture is great, the exposure perfect, and also I love the astronomical shot..
an almost huge job with I use it of the zoom... we can then see "the light diamond" before the dusk and the "cinerea (grey) light" of the shadow zone... a great job from professional
cheers
roby
7+++
|
|
|
|
|
Ahmet Baki Kocaballi
{K:13618} 8/4/2004
|
very good work!
congrats
Baki
|
|
|
|
Hugo de Wolf
{K:185110} 8/4/2004
|
Hi Tom, A very well deserved Photographer of the Day award!
Cheers,
Hugo
|
|
|
|
|
Hugo de Wolf
{K:185110} 8/1/2004
|
Hi Tom, thanks for your long and eleaborate answer.... Amazing that the sequence is not chronological! I would never have guessed that!
What I would've done? Not much different from what you did. Except maybe play with the colour temperature and exposure settings in Nikon capture. It took me a while before I figured out "how to shoot at the moon", if you catch my drift.... ) so I know exactly what you mean. Either a burned, washed out and overexposed globe, or a yellowish tone with the texture...
The small test message did not have an image attached.... It was a test message, as I received an error while uploading my comment, I tried again, but it was a one-time occurance. It's been removed, too.
Cheers,
Hugo
|
|
|
|
|
tom rumland
{K:14874} 7/31/2004
|
thanks guido! glad you like it. see my comment to hugo, i think that will explain my thoughts on the sharpness issue. plus, you are 100% correct, part of it is the lens. btw, that particular lens has been retired and replaced with a much cleaner (and longer) 80-400mm VR that produces much nicer moon shots. regarding a fixed 300mm, it's on my wishlist ;^) maybe this xmas the wife will buy me one. yeah right, she's more likely to buy me a sweater ;^)
take care,
tom
|
|
|
|
|
tom rumland
{K:14874} 7/31/2004
|
hi hugo, thanks! glad you liked the "action" being in the lower part of the frame. when laying it out it seemed too symmetrical if placed the moons in a "perfect" diagonal. i.e. top left, center and lower right. it seemed a bit too clinical. so i chose to go center-down instead and i think it works.
you said you wondered what i really wanted out of it? well, a number of things ;^) first, the moons are not "perfectly" lined up. i think the leftmost one should be higher up a bit to make the line straight.
second, and most important IMHO, i shot the whole eclipse at 10 minute intervals and my original intent was a "contact sheet" showing all the phases of the eclipse. i came to find out how difficult that is to do especially if you want detail on the moon's surface. i found that shooting the moon wide open tended to result in a globe of light with no discernible detail. i had to severely underexpose in order to get the surface detail. obviously, the more i closed the apperture the slower the shutter speeds got. this caused blur from either wind or moon motion or both.
so few of the shots came out that i had to rethink my presentation. this is what was left. which brings up the third problem i have with it. timewise, this shot is "incorrect". the correct order would be panel 2, 3 and then 1. weird huh? panel 1 is just before before complete coverage. the only thing visible to the naked eye was the lower right portion of the moon. a longish exposure took care of that and presented me with this beautiful view (same as "dark side of the moon"). as to the yellowish color, blame it on underexposure. i could have detail or proper color. i chose detail and kinda liked the yellowish tone so i went with it as is.
im curious, how would you have dealt with this in-situ?
take care,
tom
PS - btw, there was no photo attached to your test message...
|
|
|
|
|
Maria José Barres
{K:11276} 7/31/2004
|
Very nice serie!
Greetings.
|
|
|
|
|
Hugo de Wolf
{K:185110} 7/30/2004
|
Hi Tom, That has been a while! How've you been?
And a re-entry with a triptych, too! Good choice, IMO. Each shot as an individual / stand alone would not have the same effect as the combination of the tree. The good thing about this composition is the diagonal line, that runs through the tree panels.
Reading your comment that this is not quite what you had in mind, I wonder what you did have in mind.
The gradient in the tone, created by the eclipse works for me, maybe not quite the way you saw it with your own eyes, but in the triptych, it does add a harmonious element.
The only thing is that I find the three a bit soft. I'm guessing that has to do with the enlargement, though. In all, I like the exposure, and the result is quite awesome. Very well balanced. The "action" taking place on the lower part of the panels fits well too. Have you considered placing the moon more off center vertically too? Wonder what that would do.
Improvement to this triptych would mainly be cover focus and possibly the tone. It's a bit yellow. Did you shoot it as NEF? I think setting it on direct sunlight would create the blueish glow that I see when I look at the moon.
Cheers,
Hugo
|
|
|
|
Guido Tweepenninckx
{K:20076} 7/30/2004
|
exposure,colour looks fine to me.
i cannot judge on sharpness,need a 100pct crop for this.
From what I have seen,there is no zoomlens (no matter how expensive) that can beat a fix focal in 300mm or more.
I am using a very old zenith 300mm with adapter and I am very happy with it,couldn afford a new 300mm anyway,cost a fortune.
I like your presentation of the moons.
Well done Tom
|
|
0 
