Tonight's moon

[ewx]

Comments

[sweh.livejournal.com]

The moon... beautiful (http://www.mp3lyrics.org/y/yello/oh-yeah/)

[pm215]

Ah, I've been meaning to find out whether phoon gets this right:

mnementh$ phoon
                 .------------.
             .--'  o     . .   `--.
          .-'   .    O   .       . `-.
       .-'@   @@@@@@@   .  @@@@@      `-.
      /@@@  @@@@@@@@@@@   @@@@@@@   .    \
    ./    o @@@@@@@@@@@   @@@@@@@       . \.
   /@@  o   @@@@@@@@@@@.   @@@@@@@   O      \
  /@@@@   .   @@@@@@@o    @@@@@@@@@@     @@@ \
  |@@@@@               . @@@@@@@@@@@@@ o @@@@|
 /@@@@@  O  `.-./  .      @@@@@@@@@@@@    @@  \         First Quarter +
 | @@@@    --`-'       o     @@@@@@@@ @@@@    |         7  8:34:45
 |@ @@@        `    o      .  @@   . @@@@@@@  |         Full Moon -
 |       @@            .-.     @@@   @@@@@@@  |         0  0:36:18
 \  . o        @@@     `-'   . @@@@   @@@@  o /
  |      @@   @@@@@ .           @@   .       |
  \     @@@@  @\@@    /  .  O    .     o   . /
   \  o  @@     \ \  /         .    .       /
    `\     .    .\.-.___   .      .   .-. /'
      \           `-'                `-' /
       `-.   o   / |     o    O   .   .-'
          `-.   /     .       .    .-'
             `--.       .      .--'
                 `------------'

Hmm. Seems to be a bit out. (Does the visible portion depend on where on the Earth you're standing?)

[3c66b.livejournal.com]

The phase of the moon is the same everywhere. The orientation of the moon is not (easy to see by considering what it looks like in Australia!) and it's the orientation that's wrong in the ASCII art there, isn't it?

[pjc50.livejournal.com]

According to the back of this envelope, arctan(12000km/384400km) = 0.8deg, so the orientation can vary by a maximum of 1% across the earth?

[3c66b.livejournal.com]

I'd say the orientation (which physical bit of the moon is closest to the zenith for a given observer) can vary by about +/- 180 degrees!

[pjc50.livejournal.com]

Oh duh. For some reason it hadn't occured to me that the image of the moon might be rotated around that axis.

[naath.livejournal.com]

Wow!

[nomme.livejournal.com]

Spooky... I also spent a good half an hour taking pictures of the moon last night.

Unfortunately they are still in the cameras.

[new-brunette.livejournal.com]

Very nice indeed. Can you post the exif data? What post-processing did you do?

[ewx.livejournal.com]

File name    : work/web/photos/misc/moon4.jpeg
File size    : 95914 bytes
File date    : 2005:11:16 20:11:41
Camera make  : Canon
Camera model : Canon EOS 350D DIGITAL
Date/Time    : 2005:11:16 20:21:54
Resolution   : 768 x 512
Flash used   : Yes
Focal length : 280.0mm
CCD Width    : 4.93mm
Exposure time: 0.002 s  (1/500)
Aperture     : f/5.6
ISO equiv.   : 100
Exposure bias:-2.00
Exposure     : aperture priority (semi-auto)
Jpeg process : Baseline

It's still slightly overexposed though you probably wouldn't notice visually.

As for the postprocessing... I'll have to check again when at home.

[ewx.livejournal.com]

Oh, 'Flash used' in that is a lie. I don't know which component is confused.

[dave holland (from livejournal.com)]

I did wonder. That'd be a hell of a flash gun otherwise!

[ewx.livejournal.com]

Stars don't naturally go supernova, nearby civilizations just require increasingly luminous flashguns, and eventually there's only one way left to get the required brightness.

[new-brunette.livejournal.com]

Pretty impressive flashgun... :)

[davefish.livejournal.com]

Mine often gets confused as well. Not sure what is up there.

[edith-the-hutt.livejournal.com]

Nice. I've never quite been able to shoot the moon right through a normal lens, for some reason it's always slightly out of focus, did you do anything special to get that or is it me? (or as I suspect, my telephoto lens requiring a tune up)

[ewx.livejournal.com]

Nothing particularly special. EXIF data is above; autofocus was on (as was IS though it probably didn't make much difference for that particular shot). The lens wasn't quite at maximum telephoto.

[edith-the-hutt.livejournal.com]

Sounds pretty much what I tried a while back without much luck. Guess I'd better get that lens looked at.

[edith-the-hutt.livejournal.com]

Update: Lens is fine. I gots the same deal.

Half moons are a lot better, if the phase is right then you can see mountain peaks.