Post your eclipse pics here!

[mountaindew]

Dan, I also love the 3200 ISO shots..but hate to take it indoors games, like basketball and vollyball, (my kids has games) But when I got the noise reduction, it's a awesome tool. I have Ninja Noise for macintosh. It's great!

I'm going to experiment today on the new lens and will post results.

Thanks again!

[mountaindew]

I played with my picture some more..I'm thinking of getting this printed as a poster. But I would need your opinion on this first. Which one you like better...

This one?

OR

This one?

[mmeyer]

Boy, I really like that second one Marc. That is really a nice composite. Very good work. I'd get that one.

[yakfisher]

I like the second one as well. I think it would make a great poster.

[Steve Foss]

Second one gets my vote, as well. Great poster and very nice work, Marc.

[mountaindew]

Thanks! Will use the 2nd one. Going to get it sent as a poster. Thanks again for your help.

[Steve Foss]

Jackie, sorry I haven't had much time to look in the last couple of days. First of all, let me say you did a good job here.

I have little to add to Dan and Ken's advice. As always, they know their onions!

I did notice you spot metered the moon in the second shot. I shoot the 30D a lot. When your subject is basically a single consistent exposure level (like the white moon) and it fills the spot meter zone, the camera will try to expose anything within the spot meter to a mid-range gray. So it will underexpose a white moon and overexpose a black dog because it's trying to turn them each gray.

So it's time to talk about the histogram. I'm not sure how much experience you have reading them, and maybe you know all about it. If so, sorry, and you can just ignore the rest.

I generally select the info mode on the back of my camera that shows a small version of the image, some exif data and the histogram. That way I can easily make adjustments based on what the histogram is telling me.

To make a long and complicated story short as possible, I take a test shot and look at the histogram. If there are small "blinking" portions on the image, that means I've overexposed the highlights, and I use the camera's exposure compensation or manual settings to underexpose a bit. And if there's significant room to the right of the histogram, that means I can overexpose a bit, experimenting with gradual increases in exposure until the histogram almost touches the right end of the scale but just short of that. If the right edge of your histogram is cut off and/or you start getting "blinkies" on the image thumbnail, you've gone to far and need to move it back to the left a bit.

By "exposing to the right," you've ensured that your whites will be as bright as possible while still retaining full detail and that your mid range and shadow areas are also as bright as possible, which keeps them from getting as full of digital noise.

As an example, if you'd looked at the histogram on the camera back when you spot metered the moon in your second shot, you'd have seen that the histogram had a LOT of room still on the right, so you could have bumped it to the right in small increments until you had it just right and then started your shooting.

When doing that in manual exposure mode or using exposure compensation, it's always a good idea to keep looking at the histogram every few shots to make sure lighting conditions haven't changed enough to throw things off.

This method of course doesn't work when a bird's flying through the frame because you don't have time to experiment, but on static subjects like the moon and landscape shots, it's a great way to go.

If you're unfamiliar with manual or EC, the owner's booklet is clear on how to use them.

Lots of great things can be done in post processing these days, and there are some real pp wizards in here (better at it than I am), but in the end the best exposure at capture makes pp a lot easier and less time consuming.

Have fun, and hope that helps.

[yakfisher]

One last lunar eclipse composite. I am debating making this one in to a gift for some people. Let me know what you think of the quality of the moons and the arrangement of them in relation to one another. Thanks for your comments.

[MN Shutterbug]

Yakfisher, that should be in the future science books for all schools. The Smithsonian magazine would maybe like it also. You did an awesome job.

[yakfisher]

Thanks Mike. While appreciate the compliment and the money from the sales would be nice I don't quite think it is Smithsonian quality. But, thank you very much.

[dockothebay]

Steve, (Dan & Ken & the rest of you) Thanks for all the hints - I am beginning to use the histogram, and manual metering. Your explanations are really helpful, now I need to start shooting more and trying a few things -- I have been shooting with the info mode on the back of the camera, and I'm starting to use the histogram and adjusting as I go. I am absolutely a "learn by doing" kind of student. I can't remember if I was using the histogram the night of the eclipse - between the cold and being out in the dark with fogged up cheater glasses, I was happy to get anything that remotely resembled the moon! So, thanks again - I'll keep reading, shooting and learning - You guys rock!!

[Steve Foss]

Our pleasure, Jackie.

That WAS a pretty brutal night to out shooting in. Quite a few details that I'd have been very careful with on a warmer outing went unattended to, I'll say.

[mmeyer]

Yak,

That's a nice composite. If I'm honest though, I'd have to say that I'm not crazy about the layout of the moons. What I noticed right away is that the sizes are not consistent and not a real smooth curve. Now, I know just how difficult that is to accomplish. I've tried to do similar things with similar results. It's still very nice as is.

[Dbl]

I agree with Mike on this. I like the size increasing but when you get to the right side things start to get out of sequence so to speak. I think the size of the moons looks good but a little re-arrange of layers will make for a more consistant look along the curve. I like the idea!

[Steve Foss]

It's interesting how moving from photography into poster design opens the opportunities for further differences of opinion. These all certainly have their strong points. I think that final poster would need a bit more space on top. My eye is bothered by what I interpret as a crowded feel. Thanks for sharing them, everyone!

[yakfisher]

Thanks guys I'll take a look at adding a little more space and smoothing the curve.

[yakfisher]

I've made some tweaks based on some of the suggestions. I tried to stretch just the top for more space, but it wasn't right. So, I stretched the side as well. Let me know what you think now. Thanks

[fishgutz77]

WOW! nice job everyone. that just confirms my original thought which was I should just keep a rod in my hand and let the experts do the photography.

[mmeyer]

Very nicely done, Yak. I like it much better.