If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Warning do not use Lee solar filters
Savageduck:
At this point I would defer any advice on this matter to our resident stargazer, Davoud. Davoud: OMG, the pressure is on! I have bought many pairs of safe solar glasses from https://www.rainbowsymphony.com. It might be a bit late to get them, however. I haven't shopped locally, but it must be possible to buy them from Target or CVS or the like. Try to look for made in USA. I bought 200 pair about six months ago; donated 100 pair to the local community college for their public event, distributed another 50 pair to various people, and I'm taking 50 pair with me to our observing site in Tennessee for those who might arrive unprepared. Savageduck: What I am waiting for are the reports on phone cameras damaged when taking solar selfies. Tony Cooper: There will surely be some claims that iPhones are less subject to damage photographing eclipse than Android phones. Either would be suitable. I have successfully photographed the Sun with my iPhone without a filter on a number of occasions, most recently about 10 minutes ago for this post https://www.flickr.com/photos/primeval/36257163480. Based on that I would think that a smartphone would be well suited to photographing from a few seconds before totality to a few seconds afterward. I do *NOT* recommend this, but it is possible and safe to photograph the Sun with an unfiltered camera. With a DSLR I position the camera on a tripod with a piece of aluminum foil over the lens, remove the foil, snap the shutter, and replace the foil. I've been doing this with film and digital SLRs since the late 60's; I haven't *yet* burned a hole in the back of a camera. Requires low ISO, smallish aperture, pre-focusing, and fast shutter speed. I seem to recall this was called the "hat trick." -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Warning do not use Lee solar filters
On 8/18/2017 6:18 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Aug 18, 2017, newshound wrote (in articlemOqdnWB0B5ASgQrEnZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@brightvie w.co.uk): On 8/18/2017 2:32 AM, PeterN wrote: Amazon is giving refunds to all purchasers of Lee Solar filters. Under this recall you do not have to return the filters. While there is some confusion about this, I think it best not to use the Lee filter, unless you want to risk damaging your eyes, and/or your sensor. https://petapixel.com/2017/08/14/ama...clipse-filter- buyers-warning-use/ I recall going to school in 1959 with a piece of fogged 120 negative. So how is that macular degeneration working out for you? No sign yet. Dare I say it, I think people were more sensible in those days. There were warnings on the radio and TV, and people would heed them. I didn't have a telescope or a camera, but I knew how to project, if I had had a telescope. The eye has a pretty good "avert" reflex. If you close your eyes and then open them carefully behind a sufficiently dense negative, there isn't really any risk. And of course, no-one would think of sueing over bad advice. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Warning do not use Lee solar filters
On Aug 18, 2017, newshound wrote
(in articleKNOdnZmEOcve2QrEnZ2dnUU78SfNnZ2d@brightvie w.co.uk): On 8/18/2017 6:18 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Aug 18, 2017, newshound wrote (in articlemOqdnWB0B5ASgQrEnZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@brightvie w.co.uk): On 8/18/2017 2:32 AM, PeterN wrote: Amazon is giving refunds to all purchasers of Lee Solar filters. Under this recall you do not have to return the filters. While there is some confusion about this, I think it best not to use the Lee filter, unless you want to risk damaging your eyes, and/or your sensor. https://petapixel.com/2017/08/14/ama...-eclipse-filte r- buyers-warning-use/ I recall going to school in 1959 with a piece of fogged 120 negative. So how is that macular degeneration working out for you? No sign yet. Dare I say it, I think people were more sensible in those days. There were warnings on the radio and TV, and people would heed them. I didn't have a telescope or a camera, but I knew how to project, if I had had a telescope. The eye has a pretty good "avert" reflex. If you close your eyes and then open them carefully behind a sufficiently dense negative, there isn't really any risk. And of course, no-one would think of sueing over bad advice. In my school days (50’s & 60’s) we used the pinhole projection method. We had a class explaining both solar and lunar eclipses. We were warned about potential vision damage, and we still experienced all the eclipses total, and partial we were exposed to back then, without looking at the Sun. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Warning do not use Lee solar filters
On 08/18/2017 11:56 AM, PeterN wrote:
On 8/18/2017 10:42 AM, Savageduck wrote: On Aug 18, 2017, Davoud wrote (in article ): Savageduck: At this point I would defer any advice on this matter to our resident stargazer, Davoud. OMG, the pressure is on! I have bought many pairs of safe solar glasses from https://www.rainbowsymphony.com. It might be a bit late to get them, however. I haven't shopped locally, but it must be possible to buy them from Target or CVS or the like. Try to look for made in USA. I bought 200 pair about six months ago; donated 100 pair to the local community college for their public event, distributed another 50 pair to various people, and I'm taking 50 pair with me to our observing site in Tennessee for those who might arrive unprepared. What I am waiting for are the reports on phone cameras damaged when taking solar selfies. I will bet that many will use the flash I would think you would need more than one flash. Remember, the light diminishes as the square of the distance, so in order to illuminate an object 238,900 miles away (the moon, that is), you would need at least three or four strobes. Powered by a flux-capacitor from a DeLorean. -- Ken Hart |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Warning do not use Lee solar filters
Ken Hart:
I would think you would need more than one flash. Remember, the light diminishes as the square of the distance... Right. But you won't need a flash at all to photograph details on the near side. The geometry will be such that the near side will be fully illuminated by reflected earthlight. My imaging partner plans to photograph the Moon in that fashion, no doubt overexposing the solar corona by a certain amount. Should be a beautiful photo. -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Warning do not use Lee solar filters
On 8/18/2017 4:27 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Aug 18, 2017, newshound wrote (in articleKNOdnZmEOcve2QrEnZ2dnUU78SfNnZ2d@brightvie w.co.uk): On 8/18/2017 6:18 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Aug 18, 2017, newshound wrote (in articlemOqdnWB0B5ASgQrEnZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@brightvie w.co.uk): On 8/18/2017 2:32 AM, PeterN wrote: Amazon is giving refunds to all purchasers of Lee Solar filters. Under this recall you do not have to return the filters. While there is some confusion about this, I think it best not to use the Lee filter, unless you want to risk damaging your eyes, and/or your sensor. https://petapixel.com/2017/08/14/ama...-eclipse-filte r- buyers-warning-use/ I recall going to school in 1959 with a piece of fogged 120 negative. So how is that macular degeneration working out for you? No sign yet. Dare I say it, I think people were more sensible in those days. There were warnings on the radio and TV, and people would heed them. I didn't have a telescope or a camera, but I knew how to project, if I had had a telescope. The eye has a pretty good "avert" reflex. If you close your eyes and then open them carefully behind a sufficiently dense negative, there isn't really any risk. And of course, no-one would think of sueing over bad advice. In my school days (50’s & 60’s) we used the pinhole projection method. We had a class explaining both solar and lunar eclipses. We were warned about potential vision damage, and we still experienced all the eclipses total, and partial we were exposed to back then, without looking at the Sun. I have a DIY pinhole lens?. Just drilled a small hole in a body cap. -- PeterN |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Warning do not use Lee solar filters
On 8/18/2017 6:29 PM, Davoud wrote:
Ken Hart: I would think you would need more than one flash. Remember, the light diminishes as the square of the distance... Right. But you won't need a flash at all to photograph details on the near side. The geometry will be such that the near side will be fully illuminated by reflected earthlight. My imaging partner plans to photograph the Moon in that fashion, no doubt overexposing the solar corona by a certain amount. Should be a beautiful photo. Indeed. The concept sounds neat. Depending on the length of the exposure, HDR might work. For long exposures of sunsets,or sunrises, I have placed my hand, or other opaque object, near the top of the lens to hold back exposure in that area. Your shooting partner might want to try cutting a hold in the cardboard. It works something like a graduated filter, but I don't have the drawback of an extra surface. -- PeterN |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Warning do not use Lee solar filters
newshound:
I recall going to school in 1959 with a piece of fogged 120 negative. OK, but it has to be more than "fogged." It has to be saturated black. And it must have a silver emulsion, not some new-fangled compound. Savageduck: So how is that macular degeneration working out for you? As one who has macular degeneration and who is well briefed on the subject, I can tell you that the disease is not caused by looking at the Sun. There seems to be some misunderstanding about when one can look without filters during the eclipse. The problem isn't during most of the partial phase; nobody can look at the Sun long enough to damage there eyes. The danger arises when the eclipse is near totality, but not quite there. At that point it might be possible to feel comfortable looking at the Sun for a bit. But the infrared radiation is nearly certain to cause eye damage. The smart thing to do, I think, is to consult this NASA map https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov/sites/d...tive_map/index. html?zoom=1. Zoom in and click on your location and get the parameters. Have a watch set to the correct time and don't remove your filter or glasses until a few seconds into totality. Replace a few seconds before totality ends. If you're off by a second or two there will be no harm done if you look away immediately when you see a bright spot appear on the Moon's limb. Of course, if you are not in the totality zone then you must not remove your filter or glasses at any time. -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Warning do not use Lee solar filters
Davoud:
Right. But you won't need a flash at all to photograph details on the near side. The geometry will be such that the near side will be fully illuminated by reflected earthlight. My imaging partner plans to photograph the Moon in that fashion, no doubt overexposing the solar corona by a certain amount. Should be a beautiful photo. PeterN: Indeed. The concept sounds neat. Depending on the length of the exposure, HDR might work. For long exposures of sunsets,or sunrises, I have placed my hand, or other opaque object, near the top of the lens to hold back exposure in that area. Your shooting partner might want to try cutting a hold in the cardboard. It works something like a graduated filter, but I don't have the drawback of an extra surface. Believe me when I tell you that with ~2-1/2 minutes of totality there will not be time to experiment with cardboard. Doesn't matter; a nicely exposed corona, if desired, can be added in post, when there will be time to play. -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Warning do not use Lee solar filters
On Aug 18, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ): On 8/18/2017 4:27 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Aug 18, 2017, newshound wrote (in articleKNOdnZmEOcve2QrEnZ2dnUU78SfNnZ2d@brightvie w.co.uk): On 8/18/2017 6:18 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Aug 18, 2017, newshound wrote (in articlemOqdnWB0B5ASgQrEnZ2dnUU78UHNnZ2d@brightvie w.co.uk): On 8/18/2017 2:32 AM, PeterN wrote: Amazon is giving refunds to all purchasers of Lee Solar filters. Under this recall you do not have to return the filters. While there is some confusion about this, I think it best not to use the Lee filter, unless you want to risk damaging your eyes, and/or your sensor. https://petapixel.com/2017/08/14/ama...ar-eclipse-fil te r- buyers-warning-use/ I recall going to school in 1959 with a piece of fogged 120 negative. So how is that macular degeneration working out for you? No sign yet. Dare I say it, I think people were more sensible in those days. There were warnings on the radio and TV, and people would heed them. I didn't have a telescope or a camera, but I knew how to project, if I had had a telescope. The eye has a pretty good "avert" reflex. If you close your eyes and then open them carefully behind a sufficiently dense negative, there isn't really any risk. And of course, no-one would think of sueing over bad advice. In my school days (50’s & 60’s) we used the pinhole projection method. We had a class explaining both solar and lunar eclipses. We were warned about potential vision damage, and we still experienced all the eclipses total, and partial we were exposed to back then, without looking at the Sun. I have a DIY pinhole lens?. Just drilled a small hole in a body cap. Naah! Just take a piece of card, or paper, prick a hole with a needle, pin, awl or other appropriate tool. -- Regards, Savageduck |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
My first solar eclipse | mianileng | Digital Photography | 9 | July 29th 09 11:45 PM |
An image of the solar eclipse | Mike Henley | Digital Photography | 3 | April 1st 06 12:02 AM |
20D GOES SOLAR !!! | Annika1980 | Digital Photography | 19 | November 19th 04 04:52 PM |
20D GOES SOLAR !!! | Annika1980 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 9 | November 6th 04 10:54 AM |
Canon G5 + solar Charger | joe bloggs | Digital Photography | 4 | July 28th 04 04:30 PM |