Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Eclipse exposure

  1. #1

    Eclipse exposure

    I photographed the eclipse last week and not knowing the precise exposure to use, I guessed that the shadowed moon would be at least 31/2-4 stops darker than the sunlit moon.So with 100 ASA film, I exposed for 1/60 sec. @ f/3.5. Barely visible crescent. How far off was I? And do I wait for 10 years or buy a ticket to Nova Scotia? Or New Delhi or Mogadishu, or where ever? Thanks

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2002

    Eclipse exposure

    Too bad, a web search for lunar eclipse photo exposure (prior to the event) might have been worthwhile.

    You seem to have underexposed by something like 5 to 13 stops, depending on how bright the eclipse was at totality. There are two total lunar eclipses in 2004, one is visible from the Western United States. Better luck next time!

  3. #3

    Eclipse exposure

    Prior to the eclipse in May I was able to find all kinds of exposure info on the Web. All our exposures came out just fine. Unfortunately, the weather didn't cooperate with us last week.

    BTW, lunar eclipses are quite common. There were two total lunar eclipses this year that were visible in my area and there will be at least one next year. A good place to keep apprised of what's coming is the USNO Web site:

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    now in Tucson, AZ

    Eclipse exposure

    also try

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2003

    Eclipse exposure

    Gary,I guess you know that you were off. I also had a chance to photograph it and here is what I used as an exposure. Using a Mamiya RZ mounted on a motor driven telescope. f6 at 30 sec and it came out just right. Another exposure at f6 using 40 sec rendered the Pleiades clearly visible. All with E100VS film. Guy Boily

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Ottawa, Canada

    Eclipse exposure

    I shot it at F/5.6 for about 1/2 second at ISO 800, exposure came out OK, but the there was some blurring evident (700mm on a Canon 10D which is a smaller sensor then 35mm). Movement is the killer. Of course, with less focal length (an environmental shot), you could get away with more time. Tracking is the real answer, of course.

    I was not happy with the result: (Cropped). But live and learn, I guess. Patience is required in this pursuit...(I keep telling myself that)

Similar Threads

  1. pre exposure
    By John Berry ( Roadkill ) in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 2-Nov-2005, 10:14
  2. About exposure
    By Aaron_5037 in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 28-Mar-2005, 11:44
  3. Osprey Eclipse "+5" Backpacks
    By Josh Divack in forum Gear
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 20-May-2004, 22:25
  4. Pre Exposure
    By Paul Mongillo in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 5-Sep-2000, 20:36
  5. Pre-exposure
    By fw in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 7-May-2000, 22:05


Posting Permissions

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