lunar eclipse

Fantastic lunar eclipse and a nice clear sky too!

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.smith5/lunar3mar.jpg

That's a good one: stars, too!

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)
"Geoff Smith" wrote in message
...
Fantastic lunar eclipse and a nice clear sky too!

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.smith5/lunar3mar.jpg

Geoff Smith wrote:

Fantastic lunar eclipse and a nice clear sky too!

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.smith5/lunar3mar.jpg

Nice one. Very, very nice one.

Jim
--
Find me at http://www.ursaminorbeta.co.uk
AIM/iChatAV: JCAndrew2
Skype: greyarea

On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 01:29:13 GMT, Geoff Smith wrote:

Fantastic lunar eclipse and a nice clear sky too!

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.smith5/lunar3mar.jpg



I tried taking some pictures, but can't yet use my decent camera
until I get the T mount adaptor.

I managed to get some nice shots of saturn last night though. It's
tiny on the picture, but you can tell what it's meant to be.

I used my crappy little Goodmans compact camera, at its highest
resolution. Pointing down the eyepiece. Sadly, I couldn't use the
EOS to do that, as the lenses won't allow it - probably because the
focal point is too far away from lenses.

2048x1536 was the full image, here's the little cutout with just
saturn.

http://rexx.dyn-o-saur.com/~Deane/ucsm/saturn.jpg
(link will be intermittent)

The funny thing that I noticed - when looking through the telescope
at the moon, you couldn't see the shadowed part of the moon, whilst
with the naked eye, you could. Also, when it had become completely
covered, and thus brown - it appeared to be blue/grey through the
scope.

Is this some phenomenon generated by the eyes, or is it due to the
telescope's operation? It's a Meade ETX-90PE, using the supplied
26mm eyepiece.

--
http://www.rexx.co.uk
To email me, visit the site.

http://www.rexx.co.uk/runes/ - personal online rune readings

Hi,

on the question of your CCD camera not able to reproduce the redish part of
the eclisped moon,
I think the reason is that after the CCD chip has gathered up all the image
info it can get from what
ever its got hitting it theres a lot of digital processing afterwards, what
that digital processing does
will ultimatley determin what you will see, with some of the more expensive
cameras you have a
considerable amount of control on the processed image, gama correction,
frame integration, shutter speed,
contour correction, gain, dynamic noise reduction, etc the list is endless,
anyway the up shot is, the old saying
that the camera never lies is not entirley true, but the good news is that
all this control is a formidable tool to
get the best out of what you have, unfortunatley some of the cheaper cameras
tend to not give the user much
control over what the cameras doing, cos basicly they were designed to take
a picture of jessica blowing the
candles out on the birthday cake, our requirements are a little more
demanding. that said, with care it can be
remarkable what can be achieved.



"Rexx Magnus" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 01:29:13 GMT, Geoff Smith wrote:

Fantastic lunar eclipse and a nice clear sky too!

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.smith5/lunar3mar.jpg



I tried taking some pictures, but can't yet use my decent camera
until I get the T mount adaptor.

I managed to get some nice shots of saturn last night though. It's
tiny on the picture, but you can tell what it's meant to be.

I used my crappy little Goodmans compact camera, at its highest
resolution. Pointing down the eyepiece. Sadly, I couldn't use the
EOS to do that, as the lenses won't allow it - probably because the
focal point is too far away from lenses.

2048x1536 was the full image, here's the little cutout with just
saturn.

http://rexx.dyn-o-saur.com/~Deane/ucsm/saturn.jpg
(link will be intermittent)

The funny thing that I noticed - when looking through the telescope
at the moon, you couldn't see the shadowed part of the moon, whilst
with the naked eye, you could. Also, when it had become completely
covered, and thus brown - it appeared to be blue/grey through the
scope.

Is this some phenomenon generated by the eyes, or is it due to the
telescope's operation? It's a Meade ETX-90PE, using the supplied
26mm eyepiece.

--
http://www.rexx.co.uk
To email me, visit the site.

http://www.rexx.co.uk/runes/ - personal online rune readings

"Rexx Magnus" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 01:29:13 GMT, Geoff Smith wrote:

Fantastic lunar eclipse and a nice clear sky too!

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/geoff.smith5/lunar3mar.jpg



I tried taking some pictures, but can't yet use my decent camera
until I get the T mount adaptor.

I managed to get some nice shots of saturn last night though. It's
tiny on the picture, but you can tell what it's meant to be.

I used my crappy little Goodmans compact camera, at its highest
resolution. Pointing down the eyepiece. Sadly, I couldn't use the
EOS to do that, as the lenses won't allow it - probably because the
focal point is too far away from lenses.

2048x1536 was the full image, here's the little cutout with just
saturn.

http://rexx.dyn-o-saur.com/~Deane/ucsm/saturn.jpg
(link will be intermittent)

I couldnt take any pictures of the eclipse as the field of view of my scope
with my webcam is just too narrow..... I can only get a fraction of the moon
in the frame. So I too took some pics of Saturn to make the most of the
cloud free night:

http://adm.smugmug.com/gallery/974519#133513265

http://adm.smugmug.com/gallery/974519#133824384

They're a little soft - I need to work on my focus and maybe even collimate
the scope again as it hasn't been out much this winter due to the weather.

Still - it was an awesomely beautiful eclipse and looked stunning visually
through my 40mm wide angle eyepiece, even if I couldn't image it....
Watching the sunlight creep across the surface as the moon came out of
totality was amazing.

I found it amazing how much smaller the moon looked in totality. Just goes
to show that its brightness causes us to think it's bigger than it actually
is.

On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 09:06:23 GMT, adm wrote:

http://adm.smugmug.com/gallery/974519#133513265

http://adm.smugmug.com/gallery/974519#133824384

They're a little soft - I need to work on my focus and maybe even
collimate the scope again as it hasn't been out much this winter
due to the weather.


Nevertheless, they're still quite spectacular images!

"Rexx Magnus" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 09:06:23 GMT, adm wrote:

http://adm.smugmug.com/gallery/974519#133513265

http://adm.smugmug.com/gallery/974519#133824384

They're a little soft - I need to work on my focus and maybe even
collimate the scope again as it hasn't been out much this winter
due to the weather.


Nevertheless, they're still quite spectacular images!

Thanks. It always amazes me what you can do with a humble £50 webcam.

Letter to the Editor of The Times :

The REUTERS photograph accompanying your article "The night that the
Moon vanished..." ( Monday 5th March 2007, p.22 ) disproves yet again
the old adage that 'pictures never lie'. The sequence of the
'disappearing moon' has obviously been turned by 90 degrees and
added to the first photo of the full moon which is orientated
correctly. Who are you ( or REUTERS ) trying to fool - and why ?
Or is this yet another example of the journalistic spin ?
I bet Sir Patrick Moore will fire a rocket in your direction !

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multime...se_146096a.jpg
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1469702.ece


Martin