Need some Advise pls

[chris.]

Hi,, I took this photo of the night sky with the moon etc etc however the moon is mega bright a bit like the sun ??? where have i gone wrong any help and advise greatly appreciate thank you.. Mods sorry if this is in the wrong place

 

[Pookeyhead]

You haven't gone wrong. You'll never get detail in the moon while maintaining detail in the foreground. The contrast is too high for the camera to record both. It's one or the other I'm afraid.

 

[Cagey75]

There is one way, shoot the moon when it's visible on a bright morning with clear sky. But, that will give a completely different image of course.

 

[seriousrikk]

The problem you are experiencing is the moon is actually really bright.

It is, essentially, a large sunlit object in the night sky. So you need to expose it like it is lit by the sun, which would the render anything else at night extremely under exposed.

Also, I notice a little flare in your shot, this is often caused by having a filter on the lens when it isn't necessary.

 

[Pookeyhead]

You haven't gone wrong. You'll never get detail in the moon while maintaining detail in the foreground. The contrast is too high for the camera to record both. It's one or the other I'm afraid.

Or take a separate shot of the moon correctly exposed and composite it in with PS. It will look very fake though.

The moon is lit by the sun, so to correctly expose it you're looking at something in the region of 1/125th @ F16 ISO100... ish. The rest of the moonscape image is probably in the order of 1 minute or more at that aperture to be well exposed.

so...

125th starting point.
60th
30th
15th
8th
1/4
1/2
1
2
4
8
15
30
60s

That's 13 stops difference to expose the moon, and the foreground correctly. And 1 minute is just a guess.. it may well be longer.

No camera can cope with a contrast range of 13 stops. If you've seen images of a moonlit landscape with a perfectly exposed moon in the sky, they're fake.. sorry.

 

[chris.]

The problem you are experiencing is the moon is actually really bright.

It is, essentially, a large sunlit object in the night sky. So you need to expose it like it is lit by the sun, which would the render anything else at night extremely under exposed.

Also, I notice a little flare in your shot, this is often caused by having a filter on the lens when it isn't necessary.

Thanks but that flare was in the sky which really caught my eye god knows what it is ??? but its not the camera

 

[chris.]

Thanks for everyone help/advise cheers

 

[Bobby uk]

Hiya been out tonite doing some light trails and had the same problem myself moon was so bright it looked like a shining star on the finished product.
Would some sort of filter not help it?
I'm not after a detailed moon but less glear would be good

 

[st599]

Hiya been out tonite doing some light trails and had the same problem myself moon was so bright it looked like a shining star on the finished product.
Would some sort of filter not help it?
I'm not after a detailed moon but less glear would be good

You could use a DFN filter on a shot of the moon in daylight.

Or a Neutral density gradient may reduce the dynamic range a bit.

 

[Cagey75]

Or take a separate shot of the moon correctly exposed and composite it in with PS. It will look very fake though.



No camera can cope with a contrast range of 13 stops. If you've seen images of a moonlit landscape with a perfectly exposed moon in the sky, they're fake.. sorry.

This is the only real way to get a clear night scape and a clear moon. It is possible to make it less fake-ish, with good 'shopping' technique, but you definitely need dual exposures to make it work how you guys wish. Long exposure for the ground, fast exposure for the moon, cut it out and slot into your LE image basically.

 

[Pookeyhead]

You could use a DFN filter on a shot of the moon in daylight.

Or a Neutral density gradient may reduce the dynamic range a bit.

Grad will hep a little, but will not solve the issue.


A DFN will be of no use, as the moon will be not casting shadows during the day, or worse still, there will be shadows from the sun.

It always looks fake. A decent composite would be the best way, but the photoshopped moon will have to be in the same place as the original moon or the reflections and shadows will make no sense.

Also, I notice a little flare in your shot, this is often caused by having a filter on the lens when it isn't necessary.

That's not flare.. it is actually there. It's a partial halo or moonbow caused by high altitude ice crystals usually, but can be water vapour too. Just like a conventional rainbow.... although there is a little bit of flare underneath that too. You'd probably get this without a filter... just as you do when shooting directly into the sun.