Full Moon, 4th March '07

Post by **acc** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 12:22 pm

I think PS-ed is short and sweet. Nice image nonetheless.

Fuzzball · Post by **Fuzzball** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:04 pm

Great image! I brought my 9.25 to observe the full moon and saturn on the 3rd of Mar at MSC...unfortunate..my wire got pulled and the connectivity with my scope was damage. Now my scope is back in the workshop for repair...sobs

beatiful image nonetheless!

jermng · Post by **jermng** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 11:50 pm

What's MSC?

river · Post by **river** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:15 pm

My guess is MSC = multi storey car park.

Beautiful moon pic:)

IMHO... almost all digital images that we see are being processed in one way or another. PS is a common tool. Some people use PS to bring out the detail, some use PS to fake out a photo. So it is not so nice to use the word "PS-ed" since other people might get the wrong idea.

Good processing = Image enhanced.
fake photo = just say it look fake.

Post by **acc** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:02 pm

But to be really really anal, image-processing to bring out detail can be seen as 'faking-it'... But that doesn't mean we can't enjoy a photo, real or not.

ChaosKnight · Post by **ChaosKnight** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:44 pm

"When you look with your eyes
Everything seems nice
But if you look twice
you can see it's all lies"
--lily allen

starfinder · Post by **starfinder** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 6:44 am

Hi ChaosKnight,

These are very good photos. I like especially your composition and the mood imparted.

However, to settle the debate about "ps-ed" etc, could you describe the exposure settings for the two photos?

If I remember correctly, because the full Moon is very bright, the exposure time to capture it properly (i.e. to see the surface details of the craters, etc) must be very brief, perhaps 1/200 seconds.

However, the foreground (i.e. granite outcrop) if imaged at night would have required a much longer exposure, e.g. 2 seconds.

Were each of the photos one shot each only, or a combination of two each?

For the second photo, was colour added to the background sky, esp near the horizon?

kingkong · Post by **kingkong** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 8:00 am

starfinder wrote:Hi ChaosKnight,

For the second photo, was colour added to the background sky, esp near the horizon?

i believe that's a group effort... the colour in the sky was added by all Singaporeans - including you.

i must admit the sky grow adds to the overall artisticness of the photo in this case. chaos is a master!

aquillae · Post by **aquillae** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:00 am

second pic is nice too

i agree with starfinder, i think it's better to tell us a bit about the exposure settings / how you took the image next time =).

Clifford60 · Post by **Clifford60** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:21 am

In the past, when film was used, one actually tried blocking the bright object while taking the "background" and then at last second remove the block to take the bright object. But then many tries were needed. Sometime, they used dark room technique. Today, digital is doing the trick.