Moon composite

Prepare yourself... it's not a close up ;-)

It's a composite of two wide field shots of the Moon taken with my
80mm refractor. I've tried to compose the Earthshine shot with the
lunar crescent - something I must admit I find extremely hard to do
convincingly. It's subtle here and if your monitor isn't calibrated
right you'll probably miss it.

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/lunar/2...rthshine2.html

--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Hi Pete

Wierd effect! 3D terminator and flat dark side.

Very nice though!

Thanks
Paul
"Pete Lawrence" wrote in message
...
Prepare yourself... it's not a close up ;-)

It's a composite of two wide field shots of the Moon taken with my
80mm refractor. I've tried to compose the Earthshine shot with the
lunar crescent - something I must admit I find extremely hard to do
convincingly. It's subtle here and if your monitor isn't calibrated
right you'll probably miss it.

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/lunar/2...rthshine2.html

--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Pete, you send in some very nice pictures, I am looking to buy my first
telescope and would like to look at the planets and galaxies. You have
shown some great pictures of some galaxies using your 80mm ED telescope. I
would like to use a refractor my self so my question is what size do I need
to look at the planets and get a good view of galaxies? Do I need to go to
a 150mm size or will smaller do an if so what would be the smallest
diameter? Sorry thats 2 questions. I have been looking at telescopes for
over a year now and I am still undecided. I have even been toying with the
idea of a reflector or dobsan.

Steve
"Pete Lawrence" wrote in message
...
Prepare yourself... it's not a close up ;-)

It's a composite of two wide field shots of the Moon taken with my
80mm refractor. I've tried to compose the Earthshine shot with the
lunar crescent - something I must admit I find extremely hard to do
convincingly. It's subtle here and if your monitor isn't calibrated
right you'll probably miss it.

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/lunar/2...rthshine2.html

--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Pete Lawrence wrote:
It's a composite of two wide field shots of the Moon taken with my
80mm refractor. I've tried to compose the Earthshine shot with the
lunar crescent - something I must admit I find extremely hard to do
convincingly. It's subtle here and if your monitor isn't calibrated
right you'll probably miss it.

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/lunar/2...rthshine2.html

Wow, Pete, tremendous work.

May I use this image - with credit given to you, of course - in a
presentation I'm doing at a local library soon?
Along with other examples, like Anthony Ayiomamitis' magnificent analemmas,
I want to show images which demonstrate celestial mechanics at work. A
picture like this one fits right into the mix, and is the best one I've
seen. Your composite is beautifully done and looks exactly like what I see
for real.

Clear Skies,
Dave Jessie

On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 12:15:18 GMT, "Dave Jessie"
wrote:

Pete Lawrence wrote:
It's a composite of two wide field shots of the Moon taken with my
80mm refractor. I've tried to compose the Earthshine shot with the
lunar crescent - something I must admit I find extremely hard to do
convincingly. It's subtle here and if your monitor isn't calibrated
right you'll probably miss it.

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/lunar/2...rthshine2.html

Wow, Pete, tremendous work.

May I use this image - with credit given to you, of course - in a
presentation I'm doing at a local library soon?
Along with other examples, like Anthony Ayiomamitis' magnificent analemmas,
I want to show images which demonstrate celestial mechanics at work. A
picture like this one fits right into the mix, and is the best one I've
seen. Your composite is beautifully done and looks exactly like what I see
for real.

Yes of course, be my guest.
--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Stephen Jessop wrote:
Pete, you send in some very nice pictures, I am looking to buy my first
telescope and would like to look at the planets and galaxies. You have
shown some great pictures of some galaxies using your 80mm ED telescope. I
would like to use a refractor my self so my question is what size do I need
to look at the planets and get a good view of galaxies? Do I need to go to
a 150mm size or will smaller do an if so what would be the smallest
diameter? Sorry thats 2 questions. I have been looking at telescopes for
over a year now and I am still undecided. I have even been toying with the
idea of a reflector or dobsan.


Pardon me for jumping in, Stephen, but when you say "look at" I take
that to mean visual astronomy.

Pete's results are photographic, which means the camera is integrating
many photons over a relatively long period. Since our eyes cannot do
that, the views you get looking through a scope will alway disappoint
compared to astrophotographs.

For visual use (not photographic) and as a first scope, a dobsonian of
no less than 8" aperture would be a good compromise of cost, ease of
use, transportability and optical grasp. With a larger aperture you
would see more .. so that becomes a personal choice (e.g., if you have a
fixed observatory, or are really dedicated to the hobby, you could
consider much larger scopes). But an 8" dob ala the Orion series would
be a good starting point.

If your goal is to follow in Pete's photographic footsteps, then the
answer would be very different. You would need an equatorial tracking
mount of reasonably high quality .. and could achieve very nice results
with smaller apertures, at least on some targets.

Even with all that .. following in Pete's footsteps would not be easy.
His shots of a variety of objects and with several scopes show he is a
master of the art of astrophotography.

Phil

Cheers Phil

Thanks for the advice, I would like to take photos as well at some date so
would a dobsan be good for this as well? Can it be motorised as well?
"Phil Wheeler" wrote in message
...
Stephen Jessop wrote:
Pete, you send in some very nice pictures, I am looking to buy my first
telescope and would like to look at the planets and galaxies. You have
shown some great pictures of some galaxies using your 80mm ED telescope.
I would like to use a refractor my self so my question is what size do I
need to look at the planets and get a good view of galaxies? Do I need
to go to a 150mm size or will smaller do an if so what would be the
smallest diameter? Sorry thats 2 questions. I have been looking at
telescopes for over a year now and I am still undecided. I have even
been toying with the idea of a reflector or dobsan.


Pardon me for jumping in, Stephen, but when you say "look at" I take that
to mean visual astronomy.

Pete's results are photographic, which means the camera is integrating
many photons over a relatively long period. Since our eyes cannot do
that, the views you get looking through a scope will alway disappoint
compared to astrophotographs.

For visual use (not photographic) and as a first scope, a dobsonian of no
less than 8" aperture would be a good compromise of cost, ease of use,
transportability and optical grasp. With a larger aperture you would see
more .. so that becomes a personal choice (e.g., if you have a fixed
observatory, or are really dedicated to the hobby, you could consider much
larger scopes). But an 8" dob ala the Orion series would be a good
starting point.

If your goal is to follow in Pete's photographic footsteps, then the
answer would be very different. You would need an equatorial tracking
mount of reasonably high quality .. and could achieve very nice results
with smaller apertures, at least on some targets.

Even with all that .. following in Pete's footsteps would not be easy. His
shots of a variety of objects and with several scopes show he is a master
of the art of astrophotography.

Phil

Stephen Jessop wrote:
Cheers Phil

Thanks for the advice, I would like to take photos as well at some date so
would a dobsan be good for this as well? Can it be motorised as well?


For visual use (not photographic) and as a first scope, a dobsonian of no
less than 8" aperture would be a good compromise of cost, ease of use,
transportability and optical grasp. With a larger aperture you would see
more .. so that becomes a personal choice (e.g., if you have a fixed
observatory, or are really dedicated to the hobby, you could consider much
larger scopes). But an 8" dob ala the Orion series would be a good
starting point.


There are ways to use a Dob photographically for brighter objects. There
is a website on that he

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/index.p...63,201,0,0,1,0

The most I've ever done is point a digicam at one and get some credible
moon shots (as those of Starboard recently posted here).

Some folks mount Dobs on equatorial tracking platforms, either homemade
or commercial. Here is a reasonably priced commercial example:

http://www.johnsonian.com/products/type6.htm

Here's a page about how they work, with some construction plans (there
are many such websites out there, I suspect):

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/molyned...l_platform.htm

I've not done this, nor seen it done, and do not know whether the
tracking performance would support astrophotography of dimmer objects.

Phil

Interesting demonstration of seasonal variations. Showing together two
extremes which would never be seen 'live' together demonstrates the effect
of changing distance well.

"Anthony Ayiomamitis" wrote in message
...
Dave Jessie wrote:
Pete Lawrence wrote:

It's a composite of two wide field shots of the Moon taken with my
80mm refractor. I've tried to compose the Earthshine shot with the
lunar crescent - something I must admit I find extremely hard to do
convincingly. It's subtle here and if your monitor isn't calibrated
right you'll probably miss it.

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/lunar/2...rthshine2.html


Wow, Pete, tremendous work.

May I use this image - with credit given to you, of course - in a
presentation I'm doing at a local library soon?

Hi Dave,

Along with other examples, like Anthony Ayiomamitis' magnificent
analemmas,

I am delighted to learn you are happy with the analemma work in progress
and now into its sixth year. My last analemma of the series is now into
its sixth attempt, for it failed again last year (this time I had one of
the solar disks slightly misplaced - no idea what caused it - and due to
inclement weather I delayed one other exposure more than desired).

I want to show images which demonstrate celestial mechanics at work. A

Have you seen my apogee-perigee and aphelion-perihelion images? Here is
a quick peek:

http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Scenes.htm
http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Solar-Scenes.htm

picture like this one fits right into the mix, and is the best one I've
seen. Your composite is beautifully done and looks exactly like what I
see
for real.

It is a good thing Pete and I are so far away from each other. Otherwise
we would be a very bad influence on each other!

Nice work Pete (as usual)!

Anthony.


Clear Skies,
Dave Jessie

Cheers Phil

I am off to look at these web sites.

Steve
"Phil Wheeler" wrote in message
...
Stephen Jessop wrote:
Cheers Phil

Thanks for the advice, I would like to take photos as well at some date
so would a dobsan be good for this as well? Can it be motorised as well?


For visual use (not photographic) and as a first scope, a dobsonian of no
less than 8" aperture would be a good compromise of cost, ease of use,
transportability and optical grasp. With a larger aperture you would see
more .. so that becomes a personal choice (e.g., if you have a fixed
observatory, or are really dedicated to the hobby, you could consider
much larger scopes). But an 8" dob ala the Orion series would be a good
starting point.


There are ways to use a Dob photographically for brighter objects. There
is a website on that he

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/index.p...63,201,0,0,1,0

The most I've ever done is point a digicam at one and get some credible
moon shots (as those of Starboard recently posted here).

Some folks mount Dobs on equatorial tracking platforms, either homemade or
commercial. Here is a reasonably priced commercial example:

http://www.johnsonian.com/products/type6.htm

Here's a page about how they work, with some construction plans (there are
many such websites out there, I suspect):

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/molyned...l_platform.htm

I've not done this, nor seen it done, and do not know whether the tracking
performance would support astrophotography of dimmer objects.

Phil