Posted by Derek Sedillo on October 15, 2008 at 1:02 AM
I have been wanting to shoot the moon with the sea for a while now. I have a mental image of a moonlit scene - one inspired from a painting actually. I don't think I am there yet. Exposure is always a challenge. However I had fun today trying:
Some nice scenes, Derek. Some of later shots with good FG exposure were extremely nice.
I have never had much luck with moon shots and almost never include them in my scenes. Shooting slow films and using ND filters leads to long shutterspeeds. This of course leads to more time for very slight earth rotation, some obscuring cloud movements, along with oblong & unclear spheres.
Posted by Derek Sedillo on October 15, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Thanks Paul,
Shooting the moon can be both a challenge and a reward when striving to achieve a certain mood. In the Rocky Mountains photographers try to time the moonset and sunrise over certain peaks, ranges, etc... Here is one example from last Winter: http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/4001131_DtJhj#258548399_8eUzZ-A-LB
Derek, the capture of the moon in the Rocky Mountains is extremely colorful and very well done too.
Posted by Rick Dunn on October 19, 2008 at 11:00 AM
Very nice series, Derek. #3 is my favorite. The moon is a little close to the horizon for my tastes, but the soft light, water movement and comp make for a very pleasing image.
I've got a bit of a fascination with moon shots. I spent a lot of time shooting moonrise and moonsets at the Flatirons and Pawnee Buttes. My most successful efforts were the result of a lot of pre-planning, identifying a strong composition and imagining where the moon should be for maximum impact, then waiting for the time of year when the moon would be there. I use a simple, free program called Ephemeris to calculate moon position and phase. Then it's just showing up and hoping the light cooperates.
Sean Bagshaw from PNWNP has one of the best all-time ever moon shots with his time-lapse of the eclipse over Mt. Shasta, which will be on display in the Smithsonian next winter.
Paul brings up a good point about exposure times. I've found anything less than 30 seconds manageable, and 10 sec or less optimal. I rarely try to capture detail in the moon. It obviously depends on the comp, but for the wider shots that I tend to shoot, detail wouldn't add anything to the image.
Good luck getting that shot you're after!
Posted by Derek Sedillo on October 19, 2008 at 5:40 PM
Rick,
Thanks for the input. I am definately still in the experimental phase so I appreciate your feedback.
I was originally going for more of a night mood shot with the moon and moonlight reflecting on the water. And my first shot above comes the closest. However I realize this is not really a high impact shot like some others may be when more light is hitting the rocks, etc... And night scenes are a big technical challenge for me because I want to give the appearance of night while still introducing light and interesting composition.
The moon adds another element of interest. But one must be careful with exposure as you mentioned. I also found the same thing regarding timing (< 10 seconds).
Honestly it is still a work in progress. Although this section of coast is very beautiful I am just not sure it is compelling enough for a night shot. But the good part it is only a mile from where I live in Pacific Grove. So I may head down to Big Sur or to one of the lighthouses up north for more compositional interest next full moon.
Discussion
5 replieshttp://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/6234693_bgVA8/1/393587128_KUqbd#394449379_oJaY2-A-LB
http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/6234693_bgVA8/1/393587128_KUqbd#394473663_k2UF7-A-LB
http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/6234693_bgVA8/1/393587128_KUqbd#394481491_SnKu6-A-LB
It turned a kind of orange/red just before setting:
http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/6234693_bgVA8/2/394517895_Phsgw#394517895_Phsgw-A-LB
But the sky was actually better after the moon had set. So I may have to go again tomorrow.
http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/6234693_bgVA8/1/394449379_oJaY2#394433221_M62EX-XL-LB
I have never had much luck with moon shots and almost never include them in my scenes. Shooting slow films and using ND filters leads to long shutterspeeds. This of course leads to more time for very slight earth rotation, some obscuring cloud movements, along with oblong & unclear spheres.
Shooting the moon can be both a challenge and a reward when striving to achieve a certain mood. In the Rocky Mountains photographers try to time the moonset and sunrise over certain peaks, ranges, etc... Here is one example from last Winter:
http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/4001131_DtJhj#258548399_8eUzZ-A-LB
One time I even caught a coyote and the moon in the same frame:
http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/4006249_GtwEi#233112989_tDqTz-A-LB
I've got a bit of a fascination with moon shots. I spent a lot of time shooting moonrise and moonsets at the Flatirons and Pawnee Buttes. My most successful efforts were the result of a lot of pre-planning, identifying a strong composition and imagining where the moon should be for maximum impact, then waiting for the time of year when the moon would be there. I use a simple, free program called Ephemeris to calculate moon position and phase. Then it's just showing up and hoping the light cooperates.
Sean Bagshaw from PNWNP has one of the best all-time ever moon shots with his time-lapse of the eclipse over Mt. Shasta, which will be on display in the Smithsonian next winter.
Paul brings up a good point about exposure times. I've found anything less than 30 seconds manageable, and 10 sec or less optimal. I rarely try to capture detail in the moon. It obviously depends on the comp, but for the wider shots that I tend to shoot, detail wouldn't add anything to the image.
Good luck getting that shot you're after!
Thanks for the input. I am definately still in the experimental phase so I appreciate your feedback.
I was originally going for more of a night mood shot with the moon and moonlight reflecting on the water. And my first shot above comes the closest. However I realize this is not really a high impact shot like some others may be when more light is hitting the rocks, etc... And night scenes are a big technical challenge for me because I want to give the appearance of night while still introducing light and interesting composition.
The moon adds another element of interest. But one must be careful with exposure as you mentioned. I also found the same thing regarding timing (< 10 seconds).
As to the height of the moon I tend to agree. It was a bit low. So I went out the next morning and it also yielded better color on the water (less yellows). Here are some from the next day:
http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/6234693_bgVA8#395266280_M2vih-A-LB
Here is one with only the moonlight on the water allowing for a 15 second exposure:
http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/6234693_bgVA8#395270411_VsRbu-A-LB
And one a little later
http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/6234693_bgVA8#395227260_nJngp-A-LB
Honestly it is still a work in progress. Although this section of coast is very beautiful I am just not sure it is compelling enough for a night shot. But the good part it is only a mile from where I live in Pacific Grove. So I may head down to Big Sur or to one of the lighthouses up north for more compositional interest next full moon.