Did you see it?

[Judge]

Night, night

[chrisd87]

I watched it all the way through, but didn't get any photos that good!

[pim123]

Saw it ..was not impressed...they said there would be a red glow...not here there wasn't

[Judge]

I think it does have a bit of a red glow, but of course this could simply be chromatic aberration.

[HarryMango]

it does have a bit of a red glow, but of course this could simply be chromatic aberration.

Are you on about your old war wound again Bill ?

Rog

[Judge]

Have you been peeking again

[mal]

Nice photo Bill, how did you get it that good ? I watched part of it at about 11pm and took 20 photo's but not as nice as that one ( don't think the flash was powerful enough )
I though afterwards I should have taken them through my binoculars, wonder if that would have worked ??
Anyway, excellent to watch it turn red

Mal

[Judge]

Thanks Mal. I would have liked it to have been better, but not too bad for a hand held shot with a simple digital camera.

[mal]

How did you get it so big Bill ? ( hmm.. should I re-frase that )
Did you use some sort of magnifier ?

Mal

[alex_holden]

Nice photo Bill, how did you get it that good ? I watched part of it at about 11pm and took 20 photo's but not as nice as that one ( don't think the flash was powerful enough )

I saw a TV programme in 1999 where a bunch of people with more money than sense had booked a private jet to watch the solar eclipse from above the clouds. Patrick Moore was presenting it, and it was hilarious to watch him getting more and more annoyed every time they ignored him and took a picture with the flash switched on!

[mal]

Ah, maybe that's where I went wrong, I'm not an expert at that kind of photography, maybe I should have switched the flash off..I never thought ( I was only joking about the flash not been powerful enough but you may have a point ) maybe someone else can comment

Mal

[Judge]

Generally its just a question of as small an aperture as possible , together with as fast a shutter speed as possible. Not always easy. But as flash is useless, if you can, just switch it off.

[mal]

Bit late now Bill
Don't be going all technical on me... I'm only a point & shoot man

Mal

[Judge]

Sorry Mal, I used to be an LRPS, now I'm a point & shoot man too

[mal]

Sorry Mal, I used to be an LRPS,

There you go again I'll take your word for it
Good job I'm off for something to eat now

Mal

[alex_holden]

The flash is worse than useless because it causes the camera to use a fairly fast shutter speed. Using it through a window is worst of all because the flash will reflect back off the glass.

[alex_holden]

Generally its just a question of as small an aperture as possible , together with as fast a shutter speed as possible.

For taking a picture of the eclipsed moon? I thought it would have been the other way around - large aperture, slow shutter speed, fast film (or high gain on a digital), and a tripod to keep it steady?

[Judge]

Have you ever photographed the moon Alex, or tried to view it through a telescope on a fixed tripod?

[alex_holden]

Umm, I think I have but it was a long time ago and I can't remember how they came out... I do recall taking pictures of the sky with several minute exposures and the stars turning into little arcs due to the Earth's rotation, and I once got to see the moon through a big observatory telescope.

[RogerRust]

My experiance is that the moon is a very bright object so needs a suprisingly short exposure and apperture. When you view it (her) through a large telescope you need a filter to keep the image from being so bright that all you can see is a white disc.


Here are a couple of pics I took in the village by moonlght with no flash. You can see the neon from Bedford on the horizon.




I like the quality the moonlight gives the pics.