Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1

    Default Photo Exposure Help

    I tried to take some photos of the full moon last night since it was so clear. Through the camera, I could see all the details on the surface, but when I took the pictures, all I got was a white ball. I got great definition out of the clouds, though. Anybody have a clue what I did wrong? I think maybe the shutter speed was too slow because I used the suggested settings and it must have based that on the sky, which overexposed the moon.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	16_15A.jpg 
Views:	67 
Size:	10.6 KB 
ID:	248822Click image for larger version. 

Name:	24_23A.jpg 
Views:	67 
Size:	23.5 KB 
ID:	248823

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    2,613

    Default

    Yeah, it looks like the moon shots are overexposed. Try fiddling with the full manual settings to find something that works, maybe practice on a non-full moon so you'll be ready to go for the next one. Good luck!
    Ceci n'est pas une signature

  3. #3
    Thread Starter

    Default

    Which aspect do you think was off, though? The f-stop and aperture were run pretty much throughout their entire range with negligible effect, so I'm guessing it was either the shutter speed or the film speed (ISO400) that was off.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Rome (Italy)
    Posts
    285

    Default

    You did nothing wrong, it's the sensor that has a "dynamic range" way lower than your eyes. :)
    It can't register such a difference in luminosity, from very dark to very light. Usually a normal sensor can record no more than 7 stops.

    In situations like that you have to find a compromise: underexpose to have detail in the moon (making the clouds too dark), or overexpose to have detail in the clouds (burning the moon). What the "auto" setting does is find a median value that is neither fish nor flesh.

    Or... you could take multiple shots (using a tripod) and then merge the images in postproduction, using the good part of each image. In this case, remember to vary the exposure not using the aperture (since it would vary the depth of field), but the shutter speed.

    Or... if it was the entire sky to be too light, you could reduce the dynamic range by using a filter.
    Hope it helps.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Stabekk, Norway
    Posts
    2,387

    Default

    The moon is illuminated by the sun, so you need a daylight exposure. Also, it moves rather fast, so you need a fairly quick shutter speed to avoid blur.
    Blix

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Posts
    2,659
    Images
    11

    Default

    I would do a little experimenting. Set your camera ISO to around 400 and put into manual mode.

    Start with an aperture of f/16 and a shutter speed of 1/250. Then bracket your shots by taking a picture at 1/125 and 1/500. You could even try really underexposing by taking the shutter speed to 1/1000. Obviously you can do the same thing by adjusting the aperture, but since you are shooting a far away object, and you have already seen your camera wants to over expose the moon its probably best to keep the aperture as small as possible.

    It also wouldn't hurt to use a tripod.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Rawalpindi, Pakistan (with CONUS address)
    Posts
    1,906
    Images
    21

    Default

    I shot the moon last night too. Check out the EXIF info for the settings.






    Code:
    Filename - P1050038_crop.jpg
    Make - Panasonic
    Model - DMC-FZ28
    Orientation - Top left
    XResolution - 180
    YResolution - 180
    ResolutionUnit - Inch
    Software - Ver.1.0
    DateTime - 2012:06:04 23:27:25
    YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
    ExifOffset - 636
    ExposureTime - 1/320 seconds
    FNumber - 4.40
    ExposureProgram - Aperture priority
    ISOSpeedRatings - 100
    ExifVersion - 0221
    DateTimeOriginal - 2012:06:04 23:27:25
    DateTimeDigitized - 2012:06:04 23:27:25
    ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
    CompressedBitsPerPixel - 4 (bits/pixel)
    ExposureBiasValue - -0.33
    MaxApertureValue - F 2.83
    MeteringMode - Spot
    LightSource - Auto
    Flash - Flash not fired, compulsory flash mode
    FocalLength - 86.40 mm
    FlashPixVersion - 0100
    ColorSpace - sRGB
    ExifImageWidth - 1254
    ExifImageHeight - 944
    InteroperabilityOffset - 10242
    SensingMethod - One-chip color area sensor
    FileSource - DSC - Digital still camera
    SceneType - A directly photographed image
    CustomRendered - Custom process
    ExposureMode - Auto
    White Balance - Auto
    DigitalZoomRatio - 0.00 x
    FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 866 mm
    SceneCaptureType - Standard
    GainControl - None
    Contrast - Normal
    Saturation - Normal
    Sharpness - Hard
    
    Maker Note (Vendor): - 
    Image Quality - High
    Focus Mode - Auto
    AF Mode - 5 area
    Color Mode - Normal
    Faces Detected - 0
    Last edited by Oblique Human; 06-05-2012 at 07:38 AM. Reason: added EXIF because imagur.com doesn't support it

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Salem, NJ
    Posts
    104

    Default

    The easiest fix would be to try spot or center-weighted metering instead of matrix (or evaluative, depending on your camera). The matrix metering used by default on most cameras looks at the whole scene to figure out the exposure, and can get it wrong when the scene is very high contrast. By using spot metering, you would meter just for the moon. center-weighted is in between the other two. It looks at the whole scene, but puts a higher weighting on the center.

    There's an internet TV show, dtowntv (www.dtowntv.com) that just ran a segment about the metering modes last week or the week before, complete with some examples.

    You also have to remember that in an automatic mode (including aperture priority or shutter priority), if you increase the shutter speed, the camera will open the aperture more and vice versa, so the exposure stays the same. To change the exposure, you need to use exposure compensation, manual mode, or in some cases change the metering mode.

    James

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Currently working in Suzhou, China. Born in Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    3,257

    Default

    I took a very similar shot the other night and was going for mother of pearl cloud look. Using a 80mm equiv lens didn't give me much moon to work with. I also got this strange phenomemon, which I assume is effectively time-lapsed micro-meteor impacts
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails bright fluffy clouds_01.jpg   sipfls alien invasion levels_01.jpg  

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Stabekk, Norway
    Posts
    2,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scottish steve View Post
    I took a very similar shot the other night and was going for mother of pearl cloud look. Using a 80mm equiv lens didn't give me much moon to work with. I also got this strange phenomemon, which I assume is effectively time-lapsed micro-meteor impacts

    Nope, it's reflections on your front lens. Rule number one for shooting into bright objects in high contrast: Remove any filters.
    And keep the front lens 100% clean.
    Blix

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Currently working in Suzhou, China. Born in Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    3,257

    Default

    not the lens flare. I mean these
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails meteorites.jpg  

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Stabekk, Norway
    Posts
    2,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scottish steve View Post
    not the lens flare. I mean these

    Uh oh, those are clearly an alien invasion!
    Blix

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Currently working in Suzhou, China. Born in Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    3,257

    Default

    That's what I called this pic. :-)
    I'll have to try Oblique's setting when I get a clear night. I'd never have thought of using such a short exposure, but it's all a learning curve isn't it?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Rawalpindi, Pakistan (with CONUS address)
    Posts
    1,906
    Images
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scottish steve View Post
    not the lens flare. I mean these
    I knew I wasn't hallucinating, those dirty cockroach-eyed kidney-grabbing freaks.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Currently working in Suzhou, China. Born in Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    3,257

    Default

    One advantage of high humidity and pollution?
    I have several times tried to imagine an appropriate sound effect for that impact. I think I'm a geek!

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Blade exposure and aggressiveness....
    By pipskicks in forum Double Edged Razors
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-20-2012, 10:17 AM
  2. A question about blade exposure.
    By proxymoron in forum General Shaving Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-04-2010, 09:24 AM
  3. Uneven Exposure
    By Mer in forum Double Edged Razors
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-08-2009, 10:02 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •