Lunar super eclipse Sept. 27th. 2015

[russ_watters]

Cloudy. Boo. Just a few mediocre pics through little breaks. I have yet to see all of a lunar eclipse in my life.

 

[nsaspook]

We have ok conditions.

I went back to the view point of yesterday and the place was a madhouse of people with equipment. Had to leave early before they closed the gates at the bottom on the butte.

There was too much light for good shots of the blood moon rise over the mountain early today. My best early shot.

It was left of those houses but was too faint to get a shot until it was much darker and higher up. Poor Hood has almost no snow now..

 

[nsaspook]

 

[JohnnyGui]

Beautiful photos guys! I've got one physical question regarding lunar eclipses.

I know that the moon turns red because of the sunlight passing through our atmosphere which absorbs other frequencies and bending the red wavelength to the moon's direction. But why is it that the moon immediately turns red all of it at once only when it's mostly behind Earth's shadow? I'd expect that as Earth's shadow consumes the moon, the red colored moon surface would gradually increase until it's all red. Instead, the moon is partly black first by Earth's shadow until it's almost completely black just to turn all red immediately. Why is that?

 

[davenn]

thanks for everyone posting their pix

 

[Borg]

thanks for everyone posting their pix

Same here. Glad to see that some of the PF'ers were successful in seeing it.

 

[mfb]

Beautiful photos guys! I've got one physical question regarding lunar eclipses.

I know that the moon turns red because of the sunlight passing through our atmosphere which absorbs other frequencies and bending the red wavelength to the moon's direction. But why is it that the moon immediately turns red all of it at once only when it's mostly behind Earth's shadow? I'd expect that as Earth's shadow consumes the moon, the red colored moon surface would gradually increase until it's all red. Instead, the moon is partly black first by Earth's shadow until it's almost completely black just to turn all red immediately. Why is that?

It is red all the time, but due to the high contrast it is hard to see that until most of it is in the shadow.
It's like trying to see stars during the day: they are there - but you don't see them as the sky and everything else is too bright so your eyes don't adapt to darkness sufficiently.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Happy to share what I have.

Actually, I got really lucky- and not because of the weather. The internal mirror of my camera became detached from its bracket just after setup, and I decided to run the risk of permanent damage by taking photos anyway. Focus and aiming were completely blind, and the image I posted was both the only well-focused one and also the last one before the mirror got stuck in the shutter. Fortunately, this morning I (carefully) removed the mirror and the camera turned on normally. The mirror is now re-epoxied down and the patient is resting comfortably.

 

[JohnnyGui]

It is red all the time, but due to the high contrast it is hard to see that until most of it is in the shadow.
It's like trying to see stars during the day: they are there - but you don't see them as the sky and everything else is too bright so your eyes don't adapt to darkness sufficiently.

Thanks for the answer. So are you saying that when we see a part of the moon in Earth's black shadow, that part is actually red?

 

[mfb]

Well, the "shadow" is red. See post 29 where the red part is clearly visible as the image has enough dynamic range.

 

[JohnnyGui]

Well, the "shadow" is red. See post 29 where the red part is clearly visible as the image has enough dynamic range.

Ah, ok, I can see it's already partly red indeed before the moon is completely behind the shadow. What made me ask this question was the following video:


At 0:15 you'll hear the guy explaining that the moon has to be fully black first before it immediately pops in a red color instead of red gradually taking over. That's what surprised me. His explanation after that didn't make it clear for me why that happens but your explanation about red having a stronger contrast only when the moon is almost dark made sense to me.

 

[DennisN]

It's nice seeing photos coming in. I'm thinking of maybe doing some montage with the different phases of the eclipse, I took a load of photos. Maybe I'll do it tomorrow and post here later.

I did a montage which I post below. Regretfully I could not take any good closeup of the Moon when the eclipse was at maximum; my camera could not focus, which I guess was because the available light was too dim. Note: The Moon did not change size during the eclipse, I've just been a little sloppy when I did the image .

 

[davenn]

At 0:15 you'll hear the guy explaining that the moon has to be fully black first before it immediately pops in a red color instead of red gradually taking over. That's what surprised me. His explanation after that didn't make it clear for me why that happens but your explanation about red having a stronger contrast only when the moon is almost dark made sense to me.

To our very insensitive to colour eyes, and particularly to red ( hence why we astronomers use red lights to illuminate our gear etc when
under the stars) light, we see it as very dark to black till totality.
But a camera being more colour sensitive across the spectrum will pic up that red colour (as seen in the photos) long before our eyes doDave

 

[davenn]

I did a montage which I post below.

sweet set, well done

Regretfully I could not take any good closeup of the Moon when the eclipse was at maximum; my camera could not focus, which I guess was because the available light was too dim.

Big, huge, major, mega ( is that enough ) hint ... NEVER use auto focus ALWAYS use manual focus
for any and all astro photography

Dave

 

[DennisN]

Big, huge, major, mega ( is that enough ) hint ... NEVER use auto focus ALWAYS use manual focus
for any and all astro photographyDave

Thanks . Regretfully my basic camera lacks manual focus. Hopefully I will have a better camera in the future. And a telescope .

 

[davenn]

Thanks . Regretfully my basic camera lacks manual focus. Hopefully I will have a better camera in the future. And a telescope .

all ok ... yeah many point and shoots and similar are like that
Regardless you made an awesome effort, and I encourage you to keep experimentingNow for a little laugh ...
A friend did this composite...
and labelled it, a very rare event, a double eclipse

haha a good laugh :)Dave

 

[rootone]

I took a few pics with an ordinary but quite good digital camera.
Although I tried to get away from background streetlights and stuff I think that general light pollution was a problem.
They might come out OK though if I mess a round with photoshop a bit.
Visually for me in Ireland it was less impressive than I had hoped for.
Visibility was clear but it just looked like an ordinary full moon gone dark, not very noticeably red

 

[DennisN]

Note: The Moon did not change size during the eclipse, I've just been a little sloppy when I did the image

I did a somewhat less sloppy version, but the full eclipse pic is eh, somewhat pixelated , I have not got any better photos than these. I hope to see more photos from others in this thread, don't be shy...

 

[davenn]

I took a few pics with an ordinary but quite good digital camera.
Although I tried to get away from background streetlights and stuff I think that general light pollution was a problem.
They might come out OK though if I mess a round with photoshop a bit.
Visually for me in Ireland it was less impressive than I had hoped for.
Visibility was clear but it just looked like an ordinary full moon gone dark, not very noticeably red

look forward to seeing a couple from you :)

Dave

 

[davenn]

Hopefully I will have a better camera in the future. And a telescope .

Gosh, if you lived a bit closer, I would give you my Pentax K10 DSLR free
its been sitting around for ~7 yrs not being used, even the Pentax K7 doesn't really get much use any more
My wife took over the K5 when I bought the Canon gear 3 yrs ago
I would supply the camera, you could buy a reasonable new or second hand telephoto lens
I have bought reasonable camera gear at pawn shops in yrs gone by

Dennis, if you were seriously interested, and you were in a position to spend some money on a telephoto lens ?
I could do an enquiry at a post office and see if it would be worth posting it to you ... mite cost more than it's worth LOL

Dave