Searching \ for '[OT]:: Total Lunar Eclipse' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=total+lunar+eclipse
Search entire site for: ': Total Lunar Eclipse'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]:: Total Lunar Eclipse'
2007\08\28@073332 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
Tonight's total lunar eclipse as seen from my back yard - 4 stage
sequence.

       http://others.servebeer.com/misc/eclipsesequence.jpg

   290 kB.


       Russell

2007\08\28@080543 by Lee Jones

flavicon
face
> Tonight's total lunar eclipse as seen from my back yard -
> 4 stage sequence.
>
>     http://others.servebeer.com/misc/eclipsesequence.jpg

4th image, totality, looks much redder in your photograph
than what I was seeing with naked eye & binoculars (from
southern California, US west coast) -- looked much browner,
either L=1 or L=2 on the Danjon scale.

Very pleasant to sit out in the backyard, read email, and
look at the eclipse just by glancing up. :-)

                                               Lee Jones

2007\08\28@083617 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
About 30 different people from PICList viewing within an hour of
posting.
Obviously time I put paid ads on the site :-).
(Not quite slash dot but ...)

> Tonight's total lunar eclipse as seen from my back yard - 4 stage
> sequence.
>
>        http://others.servebeer.com/misc/eclipsesequence.jpg
>
>    290 kB.

2007\08\28@085953 by Dario Greggio

face picon face
Russell McMahon wrote:
> About 30 different people from PICList viewing within an hour of
> posting.

yep it was nice :)

> Obviously time I put paid ads on the site :-).

of course you should!


--
Ciao, Dario il Grande (522-485 a.C.)
--
ADPM Synthesis sas - Torino
--
http://www.adpm.tk

2007\08\28@091013 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Russell,

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 23:33:07 +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:

> Tonight's total lunar eclipse as seen from my back yard - 4 stage
> sequence.
>
>         http://others.servebeer.com/misc/eclipsesequence.jpg

Amazing photos, thanks for sharing!

It wasn't visible from here (something about it being daytime!) so I'm very grateful to be able to see it.

I've just noticed the crater just above the equator, to the right of the picture.  The ejector tracks extend for an incredibly long way - it's a good job
that the thing that caused it didn't hit us!  Of course, it may have been millions of years ago, so its effect may have become insignificant by now, but
it does reinforce the danger we're in when something like that does come our way.

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\08\28@091108 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>About 30 different people from PICList viewing within an
>hour of posting.

All from the European side of the planet?

>Obviously time I put paid ads on the site :-).
>(Not quite slash dot but ...)

<VBG>

They are real nice photos. It was impressive to see a full moon image nearly
filling the screen, until the download completed, and the image resized in
IE. to window size.

2007\08\28@101038 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>> Tonight's total lunar eclipse as seen from my back yard -
>> 4 stage sequence.
>>
>>     http://others.servebeer.com/misc/eclipsesequence.jpg
>
> 4th image, totality, looks much redder in your photograph
> than what I was seeing with naked eye & binoculars (from
> southern California, US west coast) -- looked much browner,
> either L=1 or L=2 on the Danjon scale.

Yes - but, while the camera image can indeed be made to look whatever
shade of red one wishes, it did in fact look much redder through the
SLR eyepiece than when viewed with naked eye. My lens is effectively a
1500mm (500mm mirror lens x 2X teleconverter x 1.5X camera crop
factor.) Compared to naked eye that's about 1500/50 = 30X and
binoculars were probably 7X - 12X range? I would have thought that
binoculars and lens would have had similar images.

The totality image was a 3 second exposure - I'm not sure how or if
that would affect the relative colouration in this case but sometimes
strange second order effects do creep in.

> Very pleasant to sit out in the backyard, read email, and
> look at the eclipse just by glancing up. :-)


       Russell

2007\08\28@104352 by Alex Harford

face picon face
On 8/28/07, Russell McMahon <spam_OUTapptechTakeThisOuTspamparadise.net.nz> wrote:
> Tonight's total lunar eclipse as seen from my back yard - 4 stage
> sequence.
>
>         http://others.servebeer.com/misc/eclipsesequence.jpg

My wife woke me up at 2:20am since the baby was stirring at that time,
and I went outside to have a look.  The moon was perfectly blocked by
all the maple trees surrounding my house. :(  Thanks for the pic!

Alex

2007\08\28@111719 by Rolf

face picon face
handheld, I presume .... ;-)

Actually, please tell me. How did you support that lens so effectively.
Appears to be no shake at all. A 3 second exposure would also possibly
have some subject blur, and that is about the extent of what I can see
in your pics.

In other words, did you glue your camera to a 4ton slab of concrete to
get such stable images? Not even the Konika/Mionolta/Sony image
stabilization could do that much correction (I presume you turned it
off....).

Rolf


Russell McMahon wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2007\08\28@151829 by Cedric Chang

flavicon
face
A very rare eclipse is when the sun is between the earth and moon and  
blocks a view of the moon.
Cedric


On Aug 28, 2007, at 8:25 AM, Alex Harford wrote:

On 8/28/07, Russell McMahon <.....apptechKILLspamspam@spam@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> Tonight's total lunar eclipse as seen from my back yard - 4 stage
> sequence.
>
>         http://others.servebeer.com/misc/eclipsesequence.jpg

My wife woke me up at 2:20am since the baby was stirring at that time,
and I went outside to have a look.  The moon was perfectly blocked by
all the maple trees surrounding my house. :(  Thanks for the pic!

Alex

2007\08\28@153158 by Alex Harford

face picon face
On 8/28/07, Cedric Chang <ccspamKILLspamnope9.com> wrote:
> A very rare eclipse is when the sun is between the earth and moon and
> blocks a view of the moon.
> Cedric

LOL!  I hope I never experience one of those!

Apparently due to the tidal forces on the moon increasing the distance
from the Earth to the moon, solar eclipses will stop happening in
approximately 600 million years. :(

Alex

2007\08\28@165126 by Pic

flavicon
face
Russell

Thanks for that.
Unfortunately I think we were somewhat distracted by my son throwing up
(possibly due to concussion/or food poisoning the jury is out on that one
atm) and whisking him away to the local medical centre to have him checked
over, and then subsequent childcare/soothing to notice the eclipse.

We so wanted to see it as a family and completely missed it DOH !

How long before the next one ?

Anyhow I've just shown my son the pictures and he said Coooooool !
So I guess that's an 11yr olds approval anyhow.

Cheers

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: .....piclist-bouncesKILLspamspam.....MIT.EDU [EraseMEpiclist-bouncesspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTMIT.EDU] On Behalf Of
Russell McMahon
Sent: 28 August 2007 12:33
To: PIC List
Subject: [OT]:: Total Lunar Eclipse

Tonight's total lunar eclipse as seen from my back yard - 4 stage
sequence.

       http://others.servebeer.com/misc/eclipsesequence.jpg

   290 kB.


       Russell

2007\08\28@172619 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> handheld, I presume .... ;-)

:-)

Lens is effectively 1500mm
500mm Minolta AF mirror lens.
2X AF Tamron teleconverter.
Camera 1.5X "crop factor".
So, extremely small camera shake is desirable*..
Focus is razor fine alas and depth of field is almost non existant by
normal standards.

{Quote hidden}

Manfrotto head (cheaper version)(ie only cost an arm).
Less than perfect Chinese steel legs assembly.
Tall kitchen stool with thick foam cushion.
Long bungy cord.

Mount tripod over stool so legs contact ground at bottom and stool
cushion.
Wrap bungy cord tightly around stool tripod assembly wrapping around
leg/leg combinations where adjacent.
Try variations of: Stand on stool rung / lean on cushion / brace combo
generally with body / leave alone.

Less than ideal but significantly better than tripod alone.
I'll be thinking about a better and more portable arrangement.

> Not even the Konika/Minolta/Sony image
> stabilization could do that much correction (I presume you turned it
> off....).

All except total eclipse shot were at ISO400 and 1/125th to 1/350th
second at f16 so stabilisation arguably made sense. They say to turn
it off when using a tripod but I suspect that a 1500mm lens with
1/125th of a second exposure on less than a rock steady base does not
constitute an amply stable platform.*

Totality shots, of which you see one, was 3 seconds (I tried up to 16
seconds) at ISO1600. Stabilisation was still on but should have been
off. Totally forgot that :-(.

* When platform stability is high the potential for the error
correction to introduce error makes turning stabilisation off
sensible. Time honoured rule of thumb is that minimum hand held
shutter speed is 1/focal_length seconds. eg 1/1500th second at 1500mm.
An experienced photographer can improve on that by a factor of 2 to 4
(1/1500th down to 1/350th say) and the antishake mechanism adds
another factor of 4 to 8 they say (2 to 3 stops) down to say 1/100th
so *arguably* a very very very steady hand could just about hand hold
the lens combo at about 1/100th second. In practice you'd be very
lucky to get good photos with it that way! With a tripod it does OK.

>>>> Tonight's total lunar eclipse as seen from my back yard -
>>>> 4 stage sequence.
>>>>
>>>>     http://others.servebeer.com/misc/eclipsesequence.jpg

I've "de-redded that final image somewhat in the sequence image above.
Old version is still there as

   http://others.servebeer.com/misc/eclipsesequence.old.jpg



       Russell


2007\08\28@194609 by Jinx

face picon face

> It wasn't visible from here (something about it being daytime!)

A caller to the talkback on Monday morning stopped the host
in his tracks

"Where can I see this eclipse ?", he asked in all innocence

It's like the blond joke

Blond 1 - "Oh look, a dead bird !"
Blond 2 (looking up) - "Where ?"

> so I'm very grateful to be able to see it

It made a change to the night sky. Must be what it would be like
to have Mars as a neighbour. Particularly when the eclipse was
still on but there was a chord of white like a polar cap (yes, it was
on the side)

2007\08\28@195037 by Jinx

face picon face
> (possibly due to concussion/or food poisoning

Haha, did he get a clout because at first he wouldn't eat something dodgy ?

> How long before the next one ?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10460282

"The last time a total lunar eclipse was visible over New Zealand was
in July 2000, and the next occurrence observable from New Zealand is
on December 21, 2010"

2007\08\28@202928 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> "Where can I see this eclipse ?", he asked in all innocence

I got asked that in a public meeting.
I pointed to the ceiling and said "up there"




       Russell

2007\08\28@231252 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
Scoop, a NZ online news service, 'published' my picture:
No payment but 2.3 seconds of glory.

       http://www.scoop.co.nz:80/stories/HL0708/S00371.htm



       Russell


2007\08\29@033632 by Robert Rolf

picon face


picspamspam_OUTgavin-egan.com wrote:

 > How long before the next one ?

http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/eclipse.html

and other sites.

2007\08\29@063333 by Tony Smith

picon face
> > It wasn't visible from here (something about it being daytime!)
>
> A caller to the talkback on Monday morning stopped the host
> in his tracks
>
> "Where can I see this eclipse ?", he asked in all innocence


All of my neighbours turned their lights on so they could see it better.
Thankfully (for me) they got bored fairly quickly.

Tony

2007\08\29@064429 by Jinx

face picon face

> All of my neighbours turned their lights on so they could see it
> better. Thankfully (for me) they got bored fairly quickly.

They did remember to use a flash when taking photos ?

2007\08\29@064536 by Roger, in Bangkok

face
flavicon
face
Hey ... published is published, note it in the portfolio :-)

On 8/29/07, Russell McMahon <@spam@apptechKILLspamspamparadise.net.nz> wrote:
>
> Scoop, a NZ online news service, 'published' my picture:
> No payment but 2.3 seconds of glory.
>
>        http://www.scoop.co.nz:80/stories/HL0708/S00371.htm
>
>
>
>        Russell
>
>

2007\08\29@073540 by Tony Smith

picon face
> > All of my neighbours turned their lights on so they could see it
> > better. Thankfully (for me) they got bored fairly quickly.
>
> They did remember to use a flash when taking photos ?


Now that you mention it, yes.  Sigh.

When they do the next census, they should whack an IQ test in there.  A map
of where the smart-ish people would be handy.  Much better than knowing
where the Catholics, Jedi & FSM folk hang out.

Tony

2007\08\29@082707 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>> They did remember to use a flash when taking photos ?

> Now that you mention it, yes.  Sigh.

I believe that my neighbours may also have used a flash. I was
surprised by a sudden bright flash at one stage and there were people
on a balcony about 50 feet away.

I am always intrigued at the Olympic opening and closing ceremonies by
the vast wall of flashing light that greets each activity. If these
are camera flashes, which seems a likely if not certain possibility,
then there are so many and the barrage is so continuous and
overlapping that it may in fact have the desired effect.




       Russell


2007\08\29@082708 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
A small free local paper slightly north of Auckland have also
indicated that they will use it. As the paper is free my terms allowed
fee use, so no $ there either. But, as you say, it's useful to
establish a record. Breaking into newspaper photography as a
freelancer is extremely difficult. My best photos are often enough
significantly better than the worst that they publish (as judged by
both myself and others) but so far it seems hard to convince them of
this.


       Russell

> Hey ... published is published, note it in the portfolio :-)

> On 8/29/07, Russell McMahon <KILLspamapptechKILLspamspamparadise.net.nz> wrote:
>>
>> Scoop, a NZ online news service, 'published' my picture:
>> No payment but 2.3 seconds of glory.
>>
>>        http://www.scoop.co.nz:80/stories/HL0708/S00371.htm

2007\08\29@085745 by Jinx

face picon face

> I am always intrigued at the Olympic opening and closing ceremonies
> by the vast wall of flashing light that greets each activity

I'm sure many of the big arena events have organised flashes (ie poles
with flashes on them). It's quite apparent that flashes around the venue
are not random, but appear to come from distinct locations within the
crowd/building. Maybe it's to "sparkle up" the event or just looks good

And if you think it works for the moon don't forget to wait a couple
of seconds after the flash (a really big flash, "Take that Universe !" )
before opening the shutter

2007\08\29@093938 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face

> And if you think it works for the moon don't forget to wait a couple
> of seconds after the flash (a really big flash, "Take that Universe
> !" )
> before opening the shutter


AFAIR one early lunar impactor considered using a LARGE chemical flash
(magnesium powder) as a "phone home" signal.



       Russell

2007\08\29@095453 by Tony Smith

picon face
> > I am always intrigued at the Olympic opening and closing
> ceremonies by
> > the vast wall of flashing light that greets each activity
>
> I'm sure many of the big arena events have organised flashes
> (ie poles with flashes on them). It's quite apparent that
> flashes around the venue are not random, but appear to come
> from distinct locations within the crowd/building. Maybe it's
> to "sparkle up" the event or just looks good
>
> And if you think it works for the moon don't forget to wait a
> couple of seconds after the flash (a really big flash, "Take
> that Universe !" ) before opening the shutter


Who was the idiot (read artist) urging people to paint the moon red by
pointing laser pointers at it a few years back?  Wot, no green ones?

Tony

2007\08\29@095713 by Tony Smith

picon face
> >> They did remember to use a flash when taking photos ?
>
> > Now that you mention it, yes.  Sigh.
>
> I believe that my neighbours may also have used a flash. I
> was surprised by a sudden bright flash at one stage and there
> were people on a balcony about 50 feet away.
>
> I am always intrigued at the Olympic opening and closing
> ceremonies by the vast wall of flashing light that greets
> each activity. If these are camera flashes, which seems a
> likely if not certain possibility, then there are so many and
> the barrage is so continuous and overlapping that it may in
> fact have the desired effect.


That would be the rest of world using 'point-and-shoot' cameras.  Dark =
Flash.  Some even let you override the automatic settings, but that would
require reading the manual.

I personally enjoy people taking photos of fireworks with that sort of
camera.  Handheld with the flash, of course.

Tony

2007\08\29@205552 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> I personally enjoy people taking photos of fireworks with that sort
> of
> camera.  Handheld with the flash, of course.

Has it's place if you are being truly creative, which you can be with
even a simple camera. The flash illuminates the foreground and if the
exposure time is longer (depending on the simplicity/complexity of the
camera then you can get fireworks trails as well. Of course, with a
more complex camera you can do this more effectively. But, you knew
all that.

You'll see me with a DSLR taking flash photos of fireworks most Guy
Fawke's :-).



           Russell

2007\08\29@211140 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face

On Aug 29, 2007, at 6:54 AM, Tony Smith wrote:

> That would be the rest of world using 'point-and-shoot' cameras.

Or disposables.  The "smart" self-recharging disposable flash cameras
have no way to turn the flash off.  "Sometimes" if you let it sit for
long enough that the flash cap discharges by leaking away, the flash
will stay off.  More often you get a weak first flash and then the
circuit starts back up to recharge.

BillW

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2007 , 2008 only
- Today
- New search...