Stargazing Stunning 2017 Eclipse Photos of the Corona Chromosphere

[Chronos]

corona

chromosphere

 

[.Scott]

I wasn't anywhere near totality, but I would like to see photos of the shadow banding - if anyone has some of those.

 

[hsdrop]

I would love to have some help finding a photoshop like program to help me doctor up the pics a bit. If anyone could suggest any to me it would be wonderful.

 

[hsdrop]

I was in Carbondale, Ill if anyone was wondering.

 

[Orodruin]

I would love to have some help finding a photoshop like program to help me doctor up the pics a bit. If anyone could suggest any to me it would be wonderful.

https://www.gimp.org/

 

[hsdrop]

https://www.gimp.org/

hoooooo thank you so much

 

[GetOffMyLawn]

From Manning, SC

 

[tony873004]

My 360 Video:

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Keep posting your photos! I'd love to select about a dozen of the best and put them in an Insight!

 

[OmCheeto]

My 360 Video:

On a scale of 1 to 10, I give your video a 1000 rating.

 

[OmCheeto]

I wasn't anywhere near totality, but I would like to see photos of the shadow banding - if anyone has some of those.

I found one image:

Oh. Wait. Did you say banding? And not "handing"?

My bad.

 

[.Scott]

I found one image:

Oh. Wait. Did you say banding? And not "handing"?

My bad.

In my experience, you would need a much larger area than the sheet they are using.
I saw it on the surface of a parking lot in Virginia a few decades ago.

 

[OmCheeto]

Best/worst pun of the eclipse I've seen so far:

Spoiler: Wait for it...

Totalitea. (It took me a minute. I'm old. And my brain doesn't think that fast anymore.)

 

[Janus]

A couple of points of interest in the photo I got. The colored dots on the edge of the disk are caused by solar prominences. ( I didn't realize this until I saw some higher res photos that showed them clearer in those positions.
I also caught the star Regulus in the shot. it is the white dot in the lower left of the image.

 

[OmCheeto]

A couple of points of interest in the photo I got. The colored dots on the edge of the disk are caused by solar prominences. ( I didn't realize this until I saw some higher res photos that showed them clearer in those positions.
I also caught the star Regulus in the shot. it is the white dot in the lower left of the image.
View attachment 209606

I also caught Regulus.

Though, I thought I should edit the photo, as it's a bit difficult to find.

 

[David_777]

About 10:18am Monday August 21, 2017 from Riverfront Park within a large crowd in Salem, Oregon at the totality exit stage.
Sony SEL55210 zoom at 210mm on A6000 , Aperture Priority, F14, Exposure Compensation -3, ISO 200, 1/5 second, Spot Auto Focus on sun/moon edge, on tripod. Cropped to 3500x4600 pixels though not tack sharp.

Not a very serious image on my part as I don't have specialized astronomy gear. After watching eclipse totality, at end decided to try to get a single token shot during the diamond ring phase. Without much time to monkey with my camera controls I changed the Exposure Compensation from -1 where it had been prior to totality while taking crowd photos down to -3 hoping that might be about right. Was very lucky with that as histogram shows just a bit of the diamond clipping. Although I pushed my Infrared Remote Shutter just as the sun re-appeared, there is a delay so I got a larger diamond than intended but maybe that worked out for the better as it caused more rays across the face of the dark moon enhancing its graphic. Although nicely sunny clear skies, that west central Oregon region has marine air with considerable water vapor that I'd expect contributes to more atmospheric scattering rays beyond the suns own corona light. Note other post identifies the star lower left of the sun. There is also something with a blue streak at frame bottom left corner that I also saw on another photo from the Salem area? Notice the prismic colors radiating between ray bands both above and below the diamond axis? Is that also something due to polarized light from the diamond being affected by water vapor? Certainly adds a nice effect. What about the slight halo around the moon edge, is that chromatic aberation or real? On the upper left quadrant that is yellow while at lower right is blue. Below is a 100% pixels crop.

David

 

[Morph46]

300mm f/8 400ISO post processed in Lightroom 6

 

[Stavros Kiri]

The colored dots on the edge of the disk are caused by solar prominences.

Due to the moon's craters? (The moon surface is not perfect round etc.)

 

[Janus]

Due to the moon's craters? (The moon surface is not perfect round etc.)

No, due to eruptions on the surface of the Sun like this:

 

[Stavros Kiri]

No, due to eruptions on the surface of the Sun like this:
View attachment 209626

Isn't that kind of rare? NASA on the live streaming mentioned the explanation that I quoted. I am not sure which one is true.
[Specifically, there was a lady from NASA saying that ~"the orange/purple colour effects on the edge of the sun is just sun light escaping though the imperfections of the moon (small bites, you can see), e.g. craters etc., because the moon surface is not a perfect round ..."]
But what is definitely true is that big flares are kind of rare (not a common everyday thing). Are small eruptions visible during the eclipse, e.g. with your instrument set up? I am not sure, but I kind of doubt that.

 

[Janus]

Isn't that kind of rare? NASA on the live streaming mentioned the explanation that I quoted. I am not sure which one is true.
[Specifically, there was a lady from NASA saying that ~"the orange/purple colour effects on the edge of the sun is just sun light escaping though the imperfections of the moon (small bites, you can see), e.g. craters etc., because the moon surface is not a perfect round ..."]
But what is definitely true is that big flares are kind of rare (not a common everyday thing). Are small eruptions visible during the eclipse, e.g. with your instrument set up? I am not sure, but I kind of doubt that.

I wouldn't have been sure myself but my wife came across a photo taken of this eclipse that showed the prominences like this one does from a different eclipse.
https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8889861/Solar_eclipse_1999_4_NR.jpg
and they were positioned exactly where the colored spots are in my photo.

 

[Stavros Kiri]

and they were positioned exactly where the colored spots are in my photo.

But eruptions cannot be in the same places since 1999, while moon craters can. I think on the contrary that supports NASA's interpretation, with which I tend to agree myself. You can actually see the openings of the craters as small bites under the colored spots. Now that I recall they also said on the broadcast that "it's an optical tricking of light escaping through the craters, and no sun activity!", because, "other than the two spot groups" (AR2671, AR2672), "there is nothing else significant on the sun right now" [/then]. [i.e. no solar flares - the last one was Sun Aug. 20]

See also:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/solar-activity-and-space-weather-update-thread.923468/

 

[Janus]

But eruptions cannot be in the same places since 1999, while moon craters can. I think on the contrary that supports NASA's interpretation, with which I tend to agree myself. You can actually see the openings of the craters as small bites under the colored spots. Now that I recall they also said on the broadcast that "it's an optical tricking of light escaping through the craters, and no sun activity!", because, "other than the two spot groups" (AR2671, AR2672), "there is nothing else significant on the sun right now" [/then]. [i.e. no solar flares - the last one was Sun Aug. 20]

See also:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/solar-activity-and-space-weather-update-thread.923468/

The photo I linked to was from a different eclipse. I was just using it to illustrate what the prominences looked like in the photo my wife found of this eclipse, where the positions of the prominences matched those of the spots on my photo. Besides, solar prominences are not the same thing as solar flares.
In addition, this photo and the I took prior to it were taken at the beginning of totality, where the the Sun peaking through craters would have been on the other side of the moon. Further, in both photos I took, the spots look identical. If they had been caused by light through craters, they would have changed even in the little time between the two exposures or showed up in one and not the other.. Prominences, on the other hand, can last for months.

 

[hsdrop]

Best/worst pun of the eclipse I've seen so far:

View attachment 209605

Spoiler: Wait for it...

Totalitea. (It took me a minute. I'm old. And my brain doesn't think that fast anymore.)

I thought it would have been teatality

 

[davenn]

No, due to eruptions on the surface of the Sun like this:

correct

and like this...
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=solar+prominences&FORM=HDRSC2

Isn't that kind of rare?

NO, they are happening all the time ... you just have a gap and misunderstanding
no bit hassle ... easily solved

NASA on the live streaming mentioned the explanation that I quoted. I am not sure which one is true.
[Specifically, there was a lady from NASA saying that ~"the orange/purple colour effects on the edge of the sun is just sun light escaping though the imperfections of the moon (small bites, you can see), e.g. craters etc., because the moon surface is not a perfect round ..."]

That occurs ... its called Bailey's Beads ...

here's baileys beads AND prominences ...

Baileys Beads are ALWAYS white ( bright)
Prominences are ALWAYS red to orangeDave

 

[davenn]

But what is definitely true is that big flares are kind of rare (not a common everyday thing).

another misunderstanding ... Flares and Prominences are two different animals

Flares can cause prominences BUT prominences are occurring on their own ALL the time

Dave

 

[davenn]

I think on the contrary that supports NASA's interpretation, with which I tend to agree myself. You can actually see the openings of the craters as small bites under the colored spots. Now that I recall they also said on the broadcast that "it's an optical tricking of light escaping through the craters, and no sun activity!",

Again you are misunderstanding the NASA explanations with which there is no problem with, see my earlier posts

 

[Stavros Kiri]

The photo I linked to was from a different eclipse.

Back in 1999

where the positions of the prominences matched those of the spots on my photo.

That's the problem! They haven't changed since 1999? Whereas most craters haven't ...

Besides, solar prominences are not the same thing as solar flares.

I am aware of that. But solar activity reports included none of those during or after the eclipse. (There could be some small prominences though, but I think that what you saw was due to the craters of the moon, and NASA seems to agree. However I am researching this further. [That lady, representative of NASA, could still be wrong. And they look like prominences, I agree. That was my first impression too. I hope we'll find out, to be sure.])
(We also have to keep in mind that as we are heading towards solar minimum, the solar activity is limitted and is winding down.)

where the the Sun peaking through craters would have been on the other side of the moon.

I am not sure if I know what you mean here. In any case the moon's shape and craters definitelly remains unchanged during all phases of totality. Sun's light passing through the craters though can vary, probably causing that effect.

Prominences, on the other hand, can last for months.

But not since your wife's photo back in 1999! It's probably due to craters (most of the fire glows that you captured in both cases (other people did too); it's more logical). There may have been some small prominences too though, but I can't say unless I research this further and look at official reports.

 

[arydberg]

These probably will not post but here is a link to some pictures.

http://www.maverickexperiments.com/eclipse/eclipse.html

Al

 

[davenn]

But solar activity reports included none of those during or after the eclipse.

there were prominences visible during the eclipse, many people photo'ed them

It is difficult, due to the longer exposure of Janus's pic, whether he really caught prominences.
needs a much shorter exposure to see them clearly as they are totally overridden by the brightness of the corona
I personally wouldn't be quick to say an absolute yes to them being that

(There could be some small prominences though, but I think that what you saw was due to the craters of the moon, and NASA seems to agree. However I am researching this further. [That lady, representative of NASA, could still be wrong. And they look like prominences, I agree. That was my first impression too. I hope we'll find out, to be sure.])

I have given you a response to that ... NASA wasn't wrong

I am not sure if I know what you mean here. In any case the moon's shape and craters definitelly remains unchanged during all phases of totality.

but not between different eclipses

(We also have to keep in mind that as we are heading towards solar minimum, the solar activity is limitted and is winding down.)

yes, but that doesn't slow down prominence activity to any great extent, just the number of sunspots and flares

Dave

 

[Stavros Kiri]

That occurs ... its called Bailey's Beads ...

(etc.) All your replies helped. Thanks Dave. We are sorting things out. I tend to conclude that it was a combination of the two effects. Otherwise how can photos from the 1999 eclipse can have the same fire spots, if they were all prominences? That would have been a heck of a coincidence! ...
But in identifying the two effects (prominences and Bailey's Beads) and telling them appart, the instruments' resolution, focussing and exposure time etc. play a role, I think, as you also implied, etc.

Finally, regarding

but not between different eclipses

I think major crates of the moon remain unchanged.

 

[davenn]

Otherwise how can photos from the 1999 eclipse can have the same fire spots, if they were all prominences? That would have been a heck of a coincidence! ...

indeed ... and it would also be a heck of a coincidence if they were the same gaps between mountain ridges as well hahaha

the moon is not fixed in its view from Earth ... google lunar libration which describes how the moon oscillates back and forward
and continually gives us more or less views of what is "over the horizon" of the moon
'

Dave

 

[davenn]

I can't find the NASA video link you were referring to
can you please repost

I would be surprised if they were referring to craters causing baileys beads rather than valleys between mountains

 

[Stavros Kiri]

indeed ... and it would also be a heck of a coincidence if they were the same gaps between mountain ridges as well hahaha

the moon is not fixed in its view from Earth ... google lunar libration which describes how the moon oscillates back and forward
and continually gives us more or less views of what is "over the horizon" of the moon
'

Dave

I know about lunar libration. But they were both annular eclipses and they always happen on the first day new moon phase. That limits down the phenomenon. That was probably the case (between 1999 and now) which is not a big coincidence (for the fire glow spots).
Also

I think major crates of the moon remain unchanged.

 

[Stavros Kiri]

I can't find the NASA video link you were referring to
can you please repost

I would be surprised if they were referring to craters causing baileys beads rather than valleys between mountains

It was NASA's live stream (long) for the eclipse from NASA TV. I haven't looked for it in youtube etc. yet. For the original links see:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/u-s-solar-eclipse-of-aug-21-2017.866521/page-17#post-5825887

She said ~"imperfections to the surface of the moon, such as craters etc." (covers what you say too) + ... "the moon's surface is not a perfect sphere" ... so she was being kind of general.
But you're right.

 

[davenn]

It was NASA's live stream (long) for the eclipse from NASA TV. I haven't looked for it in youtube etc. yet. For the original links see:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/u-s-solar-eclipse-of-aug-21-2017.866521/page-17#post-5825887

She said ~"imperfections to the surface of the moon, such as craters etc." (covers what you say too) + ... "the moon's surface is not a perfect sphere" ... so she was being kind of general.

coolios, thanks :)

 

[Borg]

Best/worst pun of the eclipse I've seen so far:

View attachment 209605

Spoiler: Wait for it...

Totalitea. (It took me a minute. I'm old. And my brain doesn't think that fast anymore.)

I've been waiting for someone to say this pun.

Spoiler

It totally eclipsed my expectations.

 

[Stavros Kiri]

another misunderstanding ... Flares and Prominences are two different animals

As I said in a previous reply to Janus, I am aware of that. The whole quote that you extracted from said:

But what is definitely true is that big flares are kind of rare (not a common everyday thing). Are small eruptions visible during the eclipse, e.g. with your instrument set up? I am not sure, but I kind of doubt that.

But I know the distinctions and definitions are not clear there either, leaving it kind of vague, so your posts were very worthwhile in helping to sort things out.

Now we have more chances in understanding those eclipse photos! ...

Thanks Dave

 

[bobby3]

I wasn't anywhere near totality, but I would like to see photos of the shadow banding - if anyone has some of those.

It is my understanding that shadow banding cannot be photographed. Apparently it is like an optical illusion that cameras do not detect. If I am wrong, someone let me know, I would love to see pictures or video of it also.

 

[Janus]

(etc.) All your replies helped. Thanks Dave. We are sorting things out. I tend to conclude that it was a combination of the two effects. Otherwise how can photos from the 1999 eclipse can have the same fire spots, if they were all prominences? That would have been a heck of a coincidence! ...

Reread my last post. The image I linked to was not the photo my wife found yesterday on facebook. The photo she found was of Monday's eclipse. That was the photo showing prominences in matching positions to the spots on my photo. The only reason I didn't link to the one she found was that she couldn't remember which page she saw it on and she had been looking at a lot of different pictures taken of Monday's eclipse, and I didn't pay any attention as what page it was on when she pointed it out to me.
Rather than spend a lot of time trying to find that particular photo, I just gave a link to the first photo I could find of an eclipse showing prominences that was of comparable quality to the one took of Monday's eclipse to show how they can be seen during an eclipse. It was not intended to show ones in the same positions as in my photo.

 

[Stavros Kiri]

Reread my last post. The image I linked to was not the photo my wife found yesterday on facebook. The photo she found was of Monday's eclipse. That was the photo showing prominences in matching positions to the spots on my photo. ...
... I just gave a link to the first photo I could find of an eclipse showing prominences that was of comparable quality to the one took of Monday's eclipse to show how they can be seen during an eclipse. It was not intended to show ones in the same positions as in my photo.

Ok it makes sense then.

 

[Stavros Kiri]

It is my understanding that shadow banding cannot be photographed. Apparently it is like an optical illusion that cameras do not detect. If I am wrong, someone let me know, I would love to see pictures or video of it also.

May be you'll find some information there:

https://www.physicsforums.com/posts/5769728/

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/u-s-solar-eclipse-of-aug-21-2017.866521/page-8#post-5804262

(especially on the second [video and link])

 

[.Scott]

It is my understanding that shadow banding cannot be photographed. Apparently it is like an optical illusion that cameras do not detect. If I am wrong, someone let me know, I would love to see pictures or video of it also.

It's not that it can't be photographed, only that it is difficult. The contrast is low, the brightness is changing, the bands are moving, and the bands are variable length and thickness.

But with the video cameras that have become common place, it should be no problem. Video cameras will now dynamically adjust for brightness, contrast can be handled in post-processing, and the area photographed should be fairly large - on the order of 20 or 30 feet square - not the 8 feet square you often see on the web. Also, the "screen" does not have to be white. I spotted it on parking lot pavement without a problem.

The only real problem is that it may be affected by wind and thermal conditions on the ground and perhaps aloft.

I live in NH, so I'll get my shot at it in 2024.

 

[OmCheeto]

...But with the video cameras that have become common place, it should be no problem.
...

Still waiting for a video...

 

[OmCheeto]

I subscribe to several local(state) photographers on Facebook, as, OMG, they have the best friends.

My favorite, which, I can only describe as; "This guy groks his camera's optics..."

[edit: Oops. He makes his living doing this. Ergo, his website: https://stuartnafey.smugmug.com/]

 

[OmCheeto]

I loved this one also:

(same photographer)


[edit: Oops. He makes his living doing this. Ergo, his website: https://stuartnafey.smugmug.com/]

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I've created an Insight for some of the best photos!
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/15-best-pf-2017-eclipse-photos/

 

[.Scott]

May be you'll find some information there:
https://www.physicsforums.com/posts/5769728/

Thanks for the link.

Still waiting for a video...

If you look down at the sand in your first Stavros Kiri's first video between 4:50 and 5:00 you will see blotches going slightly darker and lighter. But the camera is not handling the low contrast conditions well - and the effects can be taken as mpeg compression issues.

At a minimum, this gives me a better idea of what challenges I can expect if I attempt to video the bands in 2024.

 

[Stavros Kiri]

If you look down at the sand in your first Stavros Kiri's first video between 4:50 and 5:00 you will see blotches going slightly darker and lighter.

The original posts in the links that I quoted were done by @OmCheeto .

 

[OmCheeto]

If you look down at the sand in your first Stavros Kiri's first video between 4:50 and 5:00

The original posts in the links that I quoted were actually done by @OmCheeto .

I have no idea what video is being discussed.
But anyways, that "Smarter Every Day" guy posted an update on "shadow bands" just two days before the eclipse, and hence, I didn't see it until this morning.



As far as I can tell, I accidentally did everything correctly. Within the limitations of the equipment on hand, of course. My camera is full auto everything in movie mode.

But this is going to take some serious studying on my part[1], and some serious $$$ tucking under the mattress[2], if I want to do this experiment again, before I die of old age.

[1] This looks like a good candidate for study: High-contrast Imaging with Differential Imaging
I have no idea how to do such things.
[2] Next total eclipse is in 2019, down in Argentina/Chile. And wouldn't you know it, the first town I checked out: Primary industry: Cattle Ranching...

This is going to give me a "reputation"...

Another of my Facebook posts; "I've never slept with cows before, and it was kind of fun. Wait, that sounds kind of weird. Let me rephrase that. The cows going to bed in the fenced off pasture next to the camping grounds were somewhat entertaining. I've never heard a herd going to bed before. They talk to each other! And they all have different voices. And once in awhile, one will start doing a weird noise, that sounds like a cow version of a cat coughing up a fur ball. Which made me laugh, as I wondered then, if cows make that noise, because they're coughing up grass balls?"