Moon Shot - First Attempt - Feedback Welcome

[Sohal1989]

Hi all,

took a photograph of the moon last night, my first attempt at this shot. All feedback welcome. And if you guys have any tips, that would be greatly appreciated.

f11
1/250
300mm
iso 200


Quick shot of the moon at night. by Raj Sohal, on Flickr

 

[Mark Johnson]

A bit green. Not sure what you process with, but maybe needs less saturation or b/w correction

Nice detail though

Keep going, every night you will get it better, maybe

 

[Sohal1989]

A bit green. Not sure what you process with, but maybe needs less saturation or b/w correction

Nice detail though

Keep going, every night you will get it better, maybe

Hey! Thanks for the feedback!

I use Lightroom, I'll try and get another shot this week when it's less cloudy and try again with less saturation.

 

[gremlin16]

as Mark says, there's a definate green tinge in the top half of your moon. its a nice shot though. if you feel that you need a watermark, i'd be tempted to make it a little more discrete, it keeps dragging my eye away from the moon.

 

[StewartR]

A bit green. Not sure what you process with, but maybe needs less saturation or b/w correction

I'll try and get another shot this week when it's less cloudy and try again with less saturation.

It is a bit green. The thing is though, that's not caused by over saturation. The moon isn't actually green, so over saturating its actual colour can't make it green.

I don't know what is causing it though. Incorrect white balance? Lens aberration?

 

[StewartR]

For comparison, here's a colour photo of the moon. I boosted the saturation to bring out the real colours (caused by variations in the chemical composition of the rocks). Mostly what I got is dark blue and yellow. Not green.

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/the-moon-in-colour.653487/

 

[Jannyfox]

The Moon doesn't need f11 so I would open up a bit more and increase shutter speed to minimise any possible camera shake effect. Just the fact that you're shooting through the Earth's atmosphere will cause some inconsistency in sharpness so shoot quite a few frames and pick the best. My apologies if you know all this already and are doing it.

 

[Sohal1989]

as Mark says, there's a definate green tinge in the top half of your moon. its a nice shot though. if you feel that you need a watermark, i'd be tempted to make it a little more discrete, it keeps dragging my eye away from the moon.

It is a bit green. The thing is though, that's not caused by over saturation. The moon isn't actually green, so over saturating its actual colour can't make it green.

I don't know what is causing it though. Incorrect white balance? Lens aberration?

I'm gonna try and re-edit what I have at the moment and see if I can make it any better with the feedback you guys have given, I'll post up the result in a few. Thanks for the feedback on the watermark too, appreciate it.

For comparison, here's a colour photo of the moon. I boosted the saturation to bring out the real colours (caused by variations in the chemical composition of the rocks). Mostly what I got is dark blue and yellow. Not green.

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/the-moon-in-colour.653487/

That looks amazing!! Was that taken with multiple shots and stacked in registax?

The Moon doesn't need f11 so I would open up a bit more and increase shutter speed to minimise any possible camera shake effect. Just the fact that you're shooting through the Earth's atmosphere will cause some inconsistency in sharpness so shoot quite a few frames and pick the best. My apologies if you know all this already and are doing it.

To be honest, this is my first moon shot, i just googled "camera settings for moon photography" and used the first example. Should've played around a bit more. Thanks for the feedback.
I'm using a 55-300mm for this, so what would you recommend as an ideal fstop? 5.6?

 

[Sohal1989]

Slight adjustment

moon2-1 by Raj Sohal, on Flickr

 

[Sohal1989]

Adjusted the white balance and dropped the saturation a bit.

 

[gremlin16]

Viewing on a phone in sunlight but it looks much better to me

 

[Jannyfox]

I'm using a 55-300mm for this, so what would you recommend as an ideal fstop? 5.6?

I'm not sure I'd go wide open, but 6.3 should be quite all right and up your ss a bit. Are you using a remote release? You'll always be fighting the temptation to crop in as a longer lens is always better, but you've got some good detail there. The Moon is always more interesting when it's not full - as your image shows, you get the sidelighting picking up the depth of the craters and the peaks some of them have in the middle.

 

[Mark Johnson]

Adjusted the white balance and dropped the saturation a bit.

Yes I think this is better.

Listen to Janny, she knows her onions (or moons)

 

[Kodiak Qc]

•


What others saw as green cast in the OP,
looked more like magenta on my screen.

Nevertheless, the second serving is better!

 

[Jannyfox]

Yes I think this is better.

Listen to Janny, she knows her onions (or moons)

Hmmmmmmm.......................runs and hides under desk

 

[StewartR]

What others saw as green cast in the OP,
looked more like magenta on my screen.

That's interesting.

My screen is not calibrated. I think it's reasonably accurate, but it is not calibrated.

Here's what the area of the original image near the terminator looks like, hugely magnified in Photoshop. I'm seeing a lot of green-ish pixels and a lot of magenta-ish pixels.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

I'm seeing a lot of green-ish pixels and a lot of magenta-ish pixels.

Since I have no choice working with publishers
and printers, all my screens are calibrated and
I see a touch of green but mainly the magenta.

 

[Sohal1989]

I'm not sure I'd go wide open, but 6.3 should be quite all right and up your ss a bit. Are you using a remote release? You'll always be fighting the temptation to crop in as a longer lens is always better, but you've got some good detail there. The Moon is always more interesting when it's not full - as your image shows, you get the sidelighting picking up the depth of the craters and the peaks some of them have in the middle.

Thanks for the feedback! For that i used the 10s self timer but I do have an IR remote i can also use. Will defo give it a shot (no pun intended) with that aperture and higher shutterspeed.

 

[Sohal1989]

•


What others saw as green cast in the OP,
looked more like magenta on my screen.

Nevertheless, the second serving is better!

That's interesting.

My screen is not calibrated. I think it's reasonably accurate, but it is not calibrated.

Here's what the area of the original image near the terminator looks like, hugely magnified in Photoshop. I'm seeing a lot of green-ish pixels and a lot of magenta-ish pixels.

View attachment 101240

With the WB, is it better to use AUTO in the camera and adjust in post or set in camera and adjust in post? I've always used auto in camera.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

With the WB, is it better to use AUTO in the camera

Raj,

WB is the less critical of all the tweaks
but it is still very important.

I always set Auto WB in the cameras but
keep an eye on it in PP. Most of the time,
my Nikons won't fail me.

 

[Sohal1989]

Raj,

WB is the less critical of all the tweaks
but it is still very important.

I always set Auto WB in the cameras but
keep an eye on it in PP. Most of the time,
my Nikons won't fail me.

Thanks for the reply!

 

[Nod]

Next chance you get, have a play with assorted settings as far as ISO goes. You should get reasonably noise free images at 800 and acceptable ones even higher - see how high you can go before noise becomes a real problem at your final use stage. Once you've established the highest ISO you're happy using, play with apertures. Lenses generally perform best at a stop or 2 smaller than wide open so play! Much smaller than f/16 and a thing called diffraction will start robbing sharpness from the results so I'd take a series from wide open up to f/16 to see which give YOU the results YOU want. As long as you have a clear sky, you'll be able to shoot for ages and even do some comparisons on a proper screen so you can judge sharpness, motion blur etc. between sessions of shooting. Since the higher ISOs I've suggested will give you faster shutter speeds, you should be able to hand hold the shots which will speed things up.
Once you've settled on the settings that you feel give the best results, make a note of them - the moon is fairly constantly lit so the settings will be close to ideal for it in most phases but might need a gentle tweak depending on atmospheric conditions.

 

[Sohal1989]

Next chance you get, have a play with assorted settings as far as ISO goes. You should get reasonably noise free images at 800 and acceptable ones even higher - see how high you can go before noise becomes a real problem at your final use stage. Once you've established the highest ISO you're happy using, play with apertures. Lenses generally perform best at a stop or 2 smaller than wide open so play! Much smaller than f/16 and a thing called diffraction will start robbing sharpness from the results so I'd take a series from wide open up to f/16 to see which give YOU the results YOU want. As long as you have a clear sky, you'll be able to shoot for ages and even do some comparisons on a proper screen so you can judge sharpness, motion blur etc. between sessions of shooting. Since the higher ISOs I've suggested will give you faster shutter speeds, you should be able to hand hold the shots which will speed things up.
Once you've settled on the settings that you feel give the best results, make a note of them - the moon is fairly constantly lit so the settings will be close to ideal for it in most phases but might need a gentle tweak depending on atmospheric conditions.

I'm hoping the sky is clear tonight when i get home so will gives these a go. Thanks for the informative reply! all the info from yourself and the rest is really helpful, thanks again all!