|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Latest moon attempt
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35853148@N05/8025778157
If I tell my camera that the moon is a sunlit object (which it is), that picture comes out orangey-brown. If I use WB Auto, it's still pretty brown. If I turn off "Keep Warm Colors", then the moon comes out nearly colorless like we *expect* it to be, but with weird faint magenta and cyan patches which (to me, at least) indicate that it *had* a color which has been subtracted away. According to the folks here, the "real" color of the moon is somewhere in between brown and colorless, so I used the WB Auto version and futzed with "color temperature" (which is nothing of the kind) in Lightroom 3.6 to get a compromise. -- Please reply to: | "If more of us valued food and cheer and song pciszek at panix dot com | above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." Autoreply is disabled | --Thorin Oakenshield |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Latest moon attempt
"Paul Ciszek" wrote in message ...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35853148@N05/8025778157 If I tell my camera that the moon is a sunlit object (which it is), that picture comes out orangey-brown. If I use WB Auto, it's still pretty brown. If I turn off "Keep Warm Colors", then the moon comes out nearly colorless like we *expect* it to be, but with weird faint magenta and cyan patches which (to me, at least) indicate that it *had* a color which has been subtracted away. According to the folks here, the "real" color of the moon is somewhere in between brown and colorless, so I used the WB Auto version and futzed with "color temperature" (which is nothing of the kind) in Lightroom 3.6 to get a compromise. -- Please reply to: | "If more of us valued food and cheer and song pciszek at panix dot com | above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." Autoreply is disabled | --Thorin Oakenshield Who are these “we” that expect the moon to be colourless? Whatever your expectations might be, I expect the Moon to be the colour it is. I know brown is orange as this image demonstrates. http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co...e/illusion.JPG -- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Latest moon attempt
On Sep 26, 10:11*am, "Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway"
wrote: "Paul Ciszek" wrote in ... http://www.flickr.com/photos/35853148@N05/8025778157 If I tell my camera that the moon is a sunlit object (which it is), that picture comes out orangey-brown. *If I use WB Auto, it's still pretty brown. *If I turn off "Keep Warm Colors", then the moon comes out nearly colorless like we *expect* it to be, but with weird faint magenta and cyan patches which (to me, at least) indicate that it *had* a color which has been subtracted away. *According to the folks here, the "real" color of the moon is somewhere in between brown and colorless, so I used the WB Auto version and futzed with "color temperature" (which is nothing of the kind) in Lightroom 3.6 to get a compromise. -- Please reply to: * * * * *| "If more of us valued food and cheer and song pciszek at panix dot com *| above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." Autoreply is disabled * * | * * * --Thorin Oakenshield Who are these we that expect the moon to be colourless? Whatever your expectations might be, I expect the Moon to be the colour it is. I know brown is orange as this image demonstrates. *http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co...e/illusion.JPG -- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway How exactly did our naked and physically dark moon become so unusually monochromatic, more reflective and even UV inert to our NASA/Apollo missions? The physically dark moon is not actually monochromatic nor UV inert: Moons natural surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation cranked up, as otherwise theres no false or artificial colors added. http://spaceweather.com/submissions/...1346444660.jpg http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod200...4dnmol44vuaf43 Oddly the NASA/Apollo era and their rad-hard Kodak version of our physically dark and paramagnetic moon is apparently the one and only off-world location that becomes more inert as well as more reflective and monochromatic by the closer you get to it, and any planet other than Earth simply cant be recorded within the same FOV as having the horizon of that naked moon (regardless of the FOV direction or use of any given lens, as well as not even possible when using the worlds best film and optics along with a polarized optical filter to reduce the local surface glare doesnt seem to help). http://groups.google.com/groups/search http://translate.google.com/# Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/Guth Venus |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Latest moon attempt
On Sep 26, 12:48*pm, (Paul Ciszek) wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35853148@N05/8025778157 If I tell my camera that the moon is a sunlit object (which it is), that picture comes out orangey-brown. *If I use WB Auto, it's still pretty brown. *If I turn off "Keep Warm Colors", then the moon comes out nearly colorless like we *expect* it to be, but with weird faint magenta and cyan patches which (to me, at least) indicate that it *had* a color which has been subtracted away. *According to the folks here, the "real" color of the moon is somewhere in between brown and colorless, so I used the WB Auto version and futzed with "color temperature" (which is nothing of the kind) in Lightroom 3.6 to get a compromise. -- Please reply to: * * * * *| "If more of us valued food and cheer and song pciszek at panix dot com *| above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." Autoreply is disabled * * | * * * --Thorin Oakenshield When it comes to the Moon and planets, size matters. This was shot with a Panasonic G1 and a home-made 1000mm f8 lens. The lens aperture was 120mm. http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/imag...38333/original |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Latest moon attempt
On 9/26/12 11:48 AM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35853148@N05/8025778157 If I tell my camera that the moon is a sunlit object (which it is), that picture comes out orangey-brown. If I use WB Auto, it's still pretty brown. If I turn off "Keep Warm Colors", then the moon comes out nearly colorless like we *expect* it to be, but with weird faint magenta and cyan patches which (to me, at least) indicate that it *had* a color which has been subtracted away. According to the folks here, the "real" color of the moon is somewhere in between brown and colorless, so I used the WB Auto version and futzed with "color temperature" (which is nothing of the kind) in Lightroom 3.6 to get a compromise. Thank You, Paul. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Latest moon attempt
On 9/26/2012 7:16 PM, RichA wrote:
On Sep 26, 12:48 pm, (Paul Ciszek) wrote: http://www.flickr.com/photos/35853148@N05/8025778157 If I tell my camera that the moon is a sunlit object (which it is), that picture comes out orangey-brown. If I use WB Auto, it's still pretty brown. If I turn off "Keep Warm Colors", then the moon comes out nearly colorless like we *expect* it to be, but with weird faint magenta and cyan patches which (to me, at least) indicate that it *had* a color which has been subtracted away. According to the folks here, the "real" color of the moon is somewhere in between brown and colorless, so I used the WB Auto version and futzed with "color temperature" (which is nothing of the kind) in Lightroom 3.6 to get a compromise. -- Please reply to: | "If more of us valued food and cheer and song pciszek at panix dot com | above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." Autoreply is disabled | --Thorin Oakenshield When it comes to the Moon and planets, size matters. This was shot with a Panasonic G1 and a home-made 1000mm f8 lens. The lens aperture was 120mm. http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/imag...38333/original Very nice ! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Latest moon attempt
"AM" wrote in message ...
On 9/26/2012 7:16 PM, RichA wrote: On Sep 26, 12:48 pm, (Paul Ciszek) wrote: http://www.flickr.com/photos/35853148@N05/8025778157 If I tell my camera that the moon is a sunlit object (which it is), that picture comes out orangey-brown. If I use WB Auto, it's still pretty brown. If I turn off "Keep Warm Colors", then the moon comes out nearly colorless like we *expect* it to be, but with weird faint magenta and cyan patches which (to me, at least) indicate that it *had* a color which has been subtracted away. According to the folks here, the "real" color of the moon is somewhere in between brown and colorless, so I used the WB Auto version and futzed with "color temperature" (which is nothing of the kind) in Lightroom 3.6 to get a compromise. -- Please reply to: | "If more of us valued food and cheer and song pciszek at panix dot com | above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." Autoreply is disabled | --Thorin Oakenshield When it comes to the Moon and planets, size matters. This was shot with a Panasonic G1 and a home-made 1000mm f8 lens. The lens aperture was 120mm. http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/imag...38333/original Very nice ! ===================================== So the Moon is the colour of grated milk chocolate. This message is brought to you from the keyboard of Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Latest moon attempt
On Sep 26, 9:48*am, (Paul Ciszek) wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35853148@N05/8025778157 If I tell my camera that the moon is a sunlit object (which it is), that picture comes out orangey-brown. *If I use WB Auto, it's still pretty brown. *If I turn off "Keep Warm Colors", then the moon comes out nearly colorless like we *expect* it to be, but with weird faint magenta and cyan patches which (to me, at least) indicate that it *had* a color which has been subtracted away. *According to the folks here, the "real" color of the moon is somewhere in between brown and colorless, so I used the WB Auto version and futzed with "color temperature" (which is nothing of the kind) in Lightroom 3.6 to get a compromise. -- Please reply to: * * * * *| "If more of us valued food and cheer and song pciszek at panix dot com *| above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." Autoreply is disabled * * | * * * --Thorin Oakenshield The physically dark moon is not actually monochromatic nor UV inert: Moons natural surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation cranked up, as otherwise theres no false or artificial colors added. http://spaceweather.com/submissions/...1346444660.jpg http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod200...4dnmol44vuaf43 Oddly the NASA/Apollo era and their rad-hard Kodak version of our physically dark and paramagnetic moon is apparently the one and only off-world location that becomes more inert as well as more reflective and monochromatic by the closer you get to it, and any planet other than Earth simply cant be recorded within the same FOV as having the horizon of that naked moon (regardless of the FOV direction or use of any given lens, as well as not even possible when using the worlds best film and optics along with a polarized optical filter to reduce the local surface glare doesnt seem to help). |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Latest moon attempt
On Sep 28, 3:44*pm, AM wrote:
On 9/26/2012 7:16 PM, RichA wrote: On Sep 26, 12:48 pm, (Paul Ciszek) wrote: http://www.flickr.com/photos/35853148@N05/8025778157 If I tell my camera that the moon is a sunlit object (which it is), that picture comes out orangey-brown. *If I use WB Auto, it's still pretty brown. *If I turn off "Keep Warm Colors", then the moon comes out nearly colorless like we *expect* it to be, but with weird faint magenta and cyan patches which (to me, at least) indicate that it *had* a color which has been subtracted away. *According to the folks here, the "real" color of the moon is somewhere in between brown and colorless, so I used the WB Auto version and futzed with "color temperature" (which is nothing of the kind) in Lightroom 3.6 to get a compromise. -- Please reply to: * * * * *| "If more of us valued food and cheer and song pciszek at panix dot com *| above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." Autoreply is disabled * * | * * * --Thorin Oakenshield When it comes to the Moon and planets, size matters. *This was shot with a Panasonic G1 and a home-made 1000mm f8 lens. *The lens aperture was 120mm. http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/imag...38333/original Very nice ! Thanks. Using a scope large enough to fill the frame with an image avoids a lot of issues, namely graininess, colour irregularities and image softness. But SEEING conditions are KEY. If there is any atmospheric unsteadiness, forget it, you won't get a good image. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Latest moon attempt
In article , RichA wrote: When it comes to the Moon and planets, size matters. This was shot with a Panasonic G1 and a home-made 1000mm f8 lens. The lens aperture was 120mm. http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/imag...38333/original OK, I need to just give up. Homemade, no less. An expensive tripod doesn't hold my 500mm lens adequately still; I leave image stabilization turned on. How do you hold that 1000mm monster still enough? -- "Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither." |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
My first attempt on M42 | Gordan | Astro Pictures | 4 | November 12th 07 09:17 PM |
Next launch attempt on the 4th...why not the 3rd? | Jorge R. Frank | Space Shuttle | 1 | July 3rd 06 03:35 AM |
Theory of Everything (my attempt) | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 9 | May 19th 06 03:06 PM |
My latest moon astrophotos... an improvement | Dre | UK Astronomy | 7 | May 27th 04 06:44 AM |