Partial Lunar Eclipse in Nevada + Final Edit I think

[JimFox]

I was just North of Las Vegas on the I-15 on Tuesday when the Super Harvest Moon rose above the Horizon. The Partial Lunar Eclipse was already in effect. I posted a close up of it I captured with my Seestar S50 Smart Telescope in the Astro Section. This one was captured with my Nikon Z8 and 24-200mm lens. It's 2 exposures, I tried to get it in one exposure but the moon was just too bright. So this consists of the Landscape version which had the blown out moon, and I used a layer mask in the blown out area, and then blended in an exposure that captured more of the details of the moon.

All comments are welcome,

Jim

#1 - Original Edit

#2 - Edit Moon with less Contrast

#3 Edit - Per Grames's suggestion

#4 - Final Edit

 

[AlanLichty]

I like the concept but this just doesn't quite look right for my eyes. The moon doesn't feel like it belongs to the rest of the image with the hard edges of the orb.

 

[JimFox]

I like the concept but this just doesn't quite look right for my eyes. The moon doesn't feel like it belongs to the rest of the image with the hard edges of the orb.

Thanks Alan. I had seen while processing this, so I did soften the edges to this before I posted. I didn't want to over do it, but maybe a bit more softening is needed.

 

[AlanLichty]

Thanks Alan. I had seen while processing this, so I did soften the edges to this before I posted. I didn't want to over do it, but maybe a bit more softening is needed.

I think a wee bit more softening. It almost has that Lik Look(TM) although you didn't make it 5 times larger

 

[Jameel Hyder]

Perhaps a blend of sky and ground would work better than just blending the moon ?

 

[JimFox]

I think a wee bit more softening. It almost has that Lik Look(TM) although you didn't make it 5 times larger

I totally forgot to Lik it while processing.

 

[JimFox]

Perhaps a blend of sky and ground would work better than just blending the moon ?

The sky and ground are the same image. Only the moon came from a different one.

 

[JimFox]

I added an Edit. See if it's better.

 

[Graeme F]

Nice composition but I think the landscape would be brighter with moon glow or alternatively moon much paler?

 

[AlanLichty]

That edit definitely helps.

 

[JimFox]

Nice composition but I think the landscape would be brighter with moon glow or alternatively moon much paler?

Good idea Graeme, I brightened the ground up a bit.

 

[Kyle Jones]

One of my struggles with these (and similar attempts that I have made) is that the shadow on the moon ends up looking significantly darker than the sky. I think some of that is accurate (it is a shadow after all) but I think too stark of a difference is jarring. We are used to seeing a crescent moon with the "missing" part of the moon being the same brightness as the sky. An eclipse is different and you want to show that difference, but maybe not so much. With that in mind, you might want to brighten that shadow a little bit.

 

[JimFox]

One of my struggles with these (and similar attempts that I have made) is that the shadow on the moon ends up looking significantly darker than the sky. I think some of that is accurate (it is a shadow after all) but I think too stark of a difference is jarring. We are used to seeing a crescent moon with the "missing" part of the moon being the same brightness as the sky. An eclipse is different and you want to show that difference, but maybe not so much. With that in mind, you might want to brighten that shadow a little bit.

That was exactly my same thoughts. I processed the moon and this image separately, and processed the moon the way I thought it looked by eye. But when I blended it in, it looked like I had just pasted it in. So my struggle has been how to maintain how it looked while keeping the sky bright. The easiest solution would be to darken the sky, because then the darkness of the shadow wouldn't be so different then the sky. In the image I used for a background, the moon was completely blown out, hence the cool golden glow around it.

So yeah, I agree with everything you said. I have lightened the shadow a lot, because I had the same thought after my first go around that the shadow on the moon was too dark, so I had to go back to that moon image and lighten up the shadow and blow out a bit of the highlights to get it to try and match a bit more. I will try again, but I am just not sure, short of darkening the sky, that I can get the shadow on the moon bright enough and still look like it's a partial eclipse.

Thanks Kyle.

 

[JimFox]

Okay, 1 last edit. I am not sure which is the best one, but this last edit is my final try at it. I have no idea on how to make it more realistic short of blowing the moon completely out. )

 

[Douglas Sherman]

I agree with Alan, that it doesn't look real, Jim.

 

[JimFox]

I agree with Alan, that it doesn't look real, Jim.

Thanks Doug. I have been in the same boat, but I have run out of ideas on how to make it look real. It was a fun exercise at least.

 

[Ken Rennie]

Okay, 1 last edit. I am not sure which is the best one, but this last edit is my final try at it. I have no idea on how to make it more realistic short of blowing the moon completely out. )

Hi Jim. I woke up that morning and watched the eclipse but didn't bother photographing it as the view from my bedroom window isn't that interesting. The problem, as I see it, is that the sky wasn't even close to this bright and the partially shaded penumbra was much brighter than the sky and even the small fully shaded umbra was close to the sky brightness if not slightly brighter. It could be that the eclipse happened at different phases of the night here in the UK and with you in USA but judging how high the moon is in the sky it looks fairly similar. The real problem is the immense dynamic range and the impossible task of showing the moon f16, ISO 100, 1/125s and the earth lit by it many many stops darker in any believable way. Ken