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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
My first solar eclipse
Ever since I made one of my occasional visits to NASA's eclipse
site last year, I've been eagerly looking forward to this day. The eclipse was to be only slightly over 90% of total in my area and I knew a photo of it wouldn't be anywhere nearly as spectacular as in the totality zone. But it's the first major solar eclipse I'd have a chance to photograph. Alas, sunrise came and the morning sky was heavily overcast, with thick fog rolling in too. There wasn't even a faintly luminous spot to indicate where the sun was. My friends and I watched TV, the clock and the darkening sky as the moment of maximum eclipse came and went. Some time later, the weather relented a bit and we began to catch glimpses of the receding eclipse. I started shooting and went on to take some 60 shots. The clouds were moving so fast that the brightness level changed literally from second to second. I saw no point in trying to check my exposures in between shots as the next one would need a different level anyway. I went entirely by guesstimate and kept turning the shutter and aperture dials, using exposure values from f/11 at 1/2000 sec with a filter to f/4 at 1/20 sec without a filter. I was pleasantly surprised when I later found that more than half of the shots had acceptable exposure, at least acceptable to me, given the circumstances and my total lack of experience in shooting a solar eclipse. Here's the very first shot, taken about 10 minutes after the moment of maximum eclipse: http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...-22Jul09_1.jpg |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
My first solar eclipse
mianileng wrote:
[] Here's the very first shot, taken about 10 minutes after the moment of maximum eclipse: http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...-22Jul09_1.jpg Congratulations! And on not burning out the sensor or shutter! G Here's mine, taken from out in space: http://www.satsignal.eu/wxsat/images...7-eclipse.html and from another viewer: http://www.alanbanks.org.uk/Solar_Eclipse_220709.html Cheers, David |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
My first solar eclipse
"David J Taylor"
wrote m... Here's mine, taken from out in space: http://www.satsignal.eu/wxsat/images...7-eclipse.html ............................................. Cheers, David David, what do you do for a living??? Satellite manager, or some such??? NO, really. Rgrds, George |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
My first solar eclipse
"David J Taylor" wrote in message m... mianileng wrote: [] Here's the very first shot, taken about 10 minutes after the moment of maximum eclipse: http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...-22Jul09_1.jpg Congratulations! And on not burning out the sensor or shutter! G Oh yeah. The thought crossed my mind once or twice. But I was so busy twirling dials to compensate for the constantly changing light that I didn't stay focussed (no pun intended) on that side of the matter for long. Here's mine, taken from out in space: http://www.satsignal.eu/wxsat/images...7-eclipse.html and from another viewer: http://www.alanbanks.org.uk/Solar_Eclipse_220709.html One word: WOW!! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
My first solar eclipse
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:00:47 +0530, "mianileng"
wrote: "David J Taylor" wrote in message om... mianileng wrote: [] Here's the very first shot, taken about 10 minutes after the moment of maximum eclipse: http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...-22Jul09_1.jpg Congratulations! And on not burning out the sensor or shutter! G Oh yeah. The thought crossed my mind once or twice. But I was so busy twirling dials to compensate for the constantly changing light that I didn't stay focussed (no pun intended) on that side of the matter for long. You'd be surprised just how long you can focus the full intensity of the sun on a camera's sensor, with even a wide-angle lens let alone telephoto focal-lengths, before it will burn a spot in it. The dyes in the Bayer filter going first, long before any damage to the sensor itself. Do some calculations on radiation intensity and the heat-sink capabilities of the sensor's matrix. These calculations were done many years ago in the sci.astro.amateur newsgroup. Perhaps you could search for that discussion using Google's "group" search. From vague memory, you will grow bored of trying to focus on the sun long before it will do any damage (approx. 6 mins. if I recall). This is, of course, when the image of the sun is focused on the sensor itself, and in such a tight image that it comes from a wide-angle lens at widest apertures. Telephoto affords many more minutes of focusing and composing time due to the enlarged image of the solar-disk spreading its radiation over a wider area. The focal-plane shutters of SLR design cameras are much more prone to damage than leaf-shutter (P&S) cameras because the leaf-shutter is in a mid-distance optical path, not at the point of focus. That's a fairly nice image of a partial-eclipse, btw. I recall one total solar-eclipse that I went to photograph in N. America back in the 1970's. The slight bit of overcast greatly added to the event. It acted as a rear-projection screen so we could see the diffraction bands pass through the sky as rainbow bands of colors rapidly washing the full sky from horizon to horizon. Further adding to the effects witnessed.. Amongst other effects that the overcast revealed that "clear sky" observers would never get to enjoy. Like the onrush of the sunset colors against the inverted sky. (Total-eclipse chaser will know what I mean by an "inverted sky". It's actually quite freaky, no matter how much you know in advance of what is going on.) I never wish for perfectly "clear skies" when chasing down a solar-eclipse now. I learned my lesson from those happenstance overcast-skies and wouldn't trade that same experience for the world. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
My first solar eclipse
mianileng wrote:
Ever since I made one of my occasional visits to NASA's eclipse site last year, I've been eagerly looking forward to this day. The eclipse was to be only slightly over 90% of total in my area and I knew a photo of it wouldn't be anywhere nearly as spectacular as in the totality zone. But it's the first major solar eclipse I'd have a chance to photograph. Alas, sunrise came and the morning sky was heavily overcast, with thick fog rolling in too. There wasn't even a faintly luminous spot to indicate where the sun was. My friends and I watched TV, the clock and the darkening sky as the moment of maximum eclipse came and went. Some time later, the weather relented a bit and we began to catch glimpses of the receding eclipse. I started shooting and went on to take some 60 shots. The clouds were moving so fast that the brightness level changed literally from second to second. I saw no point in trying to check my exposures in between shots as the next one would need a different level anyway. I went entirely by guesstimate and kept turning the shutter and aperture dials, using exposure values from f/11 at 1/2000 sec with a filter to f/4 at 1/20 sec without a filter. I was pleasantly surprised when I later found that more than half of the shots had acceptable exposure, at least acceptable to me, given the circumstances and my total lack of experience in shooting a solar eclipse. Here's the very first shot, taken about 10 minutes after the moment of maximum eclipse: http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...-22Jul09_1.jpg I like the effect with the clouds. It gives the image a surreal, mysterious look. Kudos on your persistence. Bob Williams |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
My first solar eclipse
"Bob Williams" wrote in message ... mianileng wrote: Ever since I made one of my occasional visits to NASA's eclipse site last year, I've been eagerly looking forward to this day. The eclipse was to be only slightly over 90% of total in my area and I knew a photo of it wouldn't be anywhere nearly as spectacular as in the totality zone. But it's the first major solar eclipse I'd have a chance to photograph. Alas, sunrise came and the morning sky was heavily overcast, with thick fog rolling in too. There wasn't even a faintly luminous spot to indicate where the sun was. My friends and I watched TV, the clock and the darkening sky as the moment of maximum eclipse came and went. Some time later, the weather relented a bit and we began to catch glimpses of the receding eclipse. I started shooting and went on to take some 60 shots. The clouds were moving so fast that the brightness level changed literally from second to second. I saw no point in trying to check my exposures in between shots as the next one would need a different level anyway. I went entirely by guesstimate and kept turning the shutter and aperture dials, using exposure values from f/11 at 1/2000 sec with a filter to f/4 at 1/20 sec without a filter. I was pleasantly surprised when I later found that more than half of the shots had acceptable exposure, at least acceptable to me, given the circumstances and my total lack of experience in shooting a solar eclipse. Here's the very first shot, taken about 10 minutes after the moment of maximum eclipse: http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...-22Jul09_1.jpg I like the effect with the clouds. It gives the image a surreal, mysterious look. Kudos on your persistence. Bob Williams Thanks. I too felt that the pictures with thick wooly clouds looked better than those with thinner, almost uniform clouds. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
My first solar eclipse
"Further Info" wrote in message ... On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:00:47 +0530, "mianileng" wrote: "David J Taylor" wrote in message . com... mianileng wrote: [] Here's the very first shot, taken about 10 minutes after the moment of maximum eclipse: http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...-22Jul09_1.jpg Congratulations! And on not burning out the sensor or shutter! G Oh yeah. The thought crossed my mind once or twice. But I was so busy twirling dials to compensate for the constantly changing light that I didn't stay focussed (no pun intended) on that side of the matter for long. You'd be surprised just how long you can focus the full intensity of the sun on a camera's sensor, with even a wide-angle lens let alone telephoto focal-lengths, before it will burn a spot in it. The dyes in the Bayer filter going first, long before any damage to the sensor itself. Do some calculations on radiation intensity and the heat-sink capabilities of the sensor's matrix. These calculations were done many years ago in the sci.astro.amateur newsgroup. Perhaps you could search for that discussion using Google's "group" search. From vague memory, you will grow bored of trying to focus on the sun long before it will do any damage (approx. 6 mins. if I recall). This is, of course, when the image of the sun is focused on the sensor itself, and in such a tight image that it comes from a wide-angle lens at widest apertures. Telephoto affords many more minutes of focusing and composing time due to the enlarged image of the solar-disk spreading its radiation over a wider area. The focal-plane shutters of SLR design cameras are much more prone to damage than leaf-shutter (P&S) cameras because the leaf-shutter is in a mid-distance optical path, not at the point of focus. During those moments when I did think about the effect of the sun's image on the sensor, especially when I removed the filter, I felt that, since the image on the monitor was not bright enough to cause flare, it was probably not intense enough to damage the sensor. That's a fairly nice image of a partial-eclipse, btw. I recall one total solar-eclipse that I went to photograph in N. America back in the 1970's. The slight bit of overcast greatly added to the event. It acted as a rear-projection screen so we could see the diffraction bands pass through the sky as rainbow bands of colors rapidly washing the full sky from horizon to horizon. Further adding to the effects witnessed.. Amongst other effects that the overcast revealed that "clear sky" observers would never get to enjoy. Like the onrush of the sunset colors against the inverted sky. (Total-eclipse chaser will know what I mean by an "inverted sky". It's actually quite freaky, no matter how much you know in advance of what is going on.) I never wish for perfectly "clear skies" when chasing down a solar-eclipse now. I learned my lesson from those happenstance overcast-skies and wouldn't trade that same experience for the world. You've confirmed something that's been in my mind after the event. It was frustrating not to be able to see the progress and the peak of the eclipse, but I too felt that the clouds made the photos more interesting. One observer team, though, was even less fortunate than we were. The state's Science Promotion Department and the local astronomy club led the team of more than a hundred individuals to a hill top that they thought would be a good observation point. The thick fog that enveloped most of the town lasted much longer at their location than it did at ours. They never caught even a glimpse of the whole thing. One local newspaper printed a photo of the team because they didn't have a single photo of the eclipse itself. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
My first solar eclipse
mianileng wrote:
Bob Williams wrote mianileng wrote: ... Some time later, the weather relented a bit and we began to catch glimpses of the receding eclipse. I started shooting and went on to take some 60 shots. The clouds were moving so fast that the brightness level changed literally from second to second. I saw no point in trying to check my exposures in between shots as the next one would need a different level anyway. I went entirely by guesstimate and kept turning the shutter and aperture dials, using exposure values from f/11 at 1/2000 sec with a filter to f/4 at 1/20 sec without a filter. I was pleasantly surprised when I later found that more than half of the shots had acceptable exposure, at least acceptable to me, given the circumstances and my total lack of experience in shooting a solar eclipse. Here's the very first shot, taken about 10 minutes after the moment of maximum eclipse: http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...-22Jul09_1.jpg I like the effect with the clouds. It gives the image a surreal, mysterious look. Kudos on your persistence. Bob Williams Thanks. I too felt that the pictures with thick wooly clouds looked better than those with thinner, almost uniform clouds. Beautiful, thanks for sharing. For comparison, here's one I got of the normal afternoon sun through fog at 1/1250 seconds, I think it was 500mm f/5.6. http://www.flickr.com/photos/edgehill/2841308492/ and the moon: http://edgehill.net/nature/weather/more/pg2pc11 -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
An image of the solar eclipse | Mike Henley | Digital Photography | 3 | April 1st 06 12:02 AM |
Solar Eclipse March 29 2006: only 9 days left ! | [email protected] | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | March 22nd 06 12:07 AM |
Solar Eclipse March 29; Only 2 Weeks To Go! | astrofan | Digital Photography | 2 | March 16th 06 10:18 AM |
Solar Eclipse March 29th 2006 | astrofan | Digital Photography | 5 | March 10th 06 09:50 PM |
20D GOES SOLAR !!! | Annika1980 | Digital Photography | 19 | November 19th 04 04:52 PM |