Under A Blood Red Moon - Perigee Lunar Eclipse aka "Supermoon"

[UstadKhanAli]

This composite photo shows a full moon with an annual Harvest Moon with a perigee moon, otherwise known as a supermoon. A perigee moon, the opposite of an apogee moon, is about 31,000 miles/49889 km closer to the Earth than an apogee moon, which under ideal conditions can make the moon appear 14% larger and 30% brighter than an apogee full moon, which is why many have labeled it "supermoon". This information is taken from the NASA website.

 

But making it more exciting was the moon's reddish hue. This occurs because sunlight passing through the earth's atmosphere is reddened and bent inward toward the darkened surface of the eclipsed moon. This information is taken from an article written by Dennis Mammana.

 

The Upper Las Virgenes Canyon Open Space Preserve was open for this event, and many of us gathered on a hill overlooking the San Fernando Valley to witness this event,which had not occurred since 1982 - and will not be repeated until 2033. The evening was unfortunately cloudy and hazy, with the moon disappearing for many minutes at a time, so these photos aren't as sharp as I was hoping for.

 

Although I have been taking night sky photos for about three years, this is the first time I took photos of only the moon! And it was a lot of fun!!

 

Now for the really geeky stuff. This is a composite of five photos of hte perigee lunar eclipse. Aside from the composite, the photos show the natural appearance of the moon during that time. The total eclipse of the moon occurred on 27 September 2015 between 7:11 pm - 8:23 Pacific Daylight Time here in Los Angeles, CA. I took each photo of the moon between 7:54 pm to 8:43 pm, mostly closer to those times and not so much in between. This is due to clouds obscuring the moon, often for as long as 15-20 minutes, with several other times in which the moon was completely or almost completely hidden behind clouds, Consequently, this is not an accurate time-lapse in any capacity. And conditions were hazy even when the moon did appear from behind the clouds, so these aren't the clearest, sharpest photos. But no matter, the experience was totally enjoyable. I used a Nikon D7000 with a 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 G VR AF-S ED zoom lens at about 250mm, not extending it all the way because the moon appeared to be sharper when the lens was not fully extended. But because I was using an APC-S sensor, 250mm is actually closer to about 375mm.

 

Under a Blood Red Moon

Ken Lee Photography

Nikon D7000, Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 G VR AF-S ED Zoom @ 250mm. 2015-09-27 This is a composite of five moons taken between 19:54 - 20:43. First two moons 3s f/8 ISO 1600; last three moons 2.5s f/11 ISO 1000. 4000k. This is a composite of five photos done in Photoshop CS6. Aside from the composite, the photos show the natural appearance of the moon during that time.

Upper Las Virgenes Canyon Open Space Preserve, West Hills, CA USA/EE UU.

 

[nat whilk II]

I love this kind of stuff. Here in Austin it was quite hazy, especially right when the moon came up, but we got some of the thrill. My son, who has a pretty decent reflecting telescope, drove a couple hundred miles up to past San Angelo just to get a good look with his 'scope.

 

Telescopes of pretty amazing power and sophistication are getting more affordable all the time - I would love to be a serious sky watcher, but I don't have the time for it. Unless I gave up something like writing songs and recording - fat chance of that.

 

The Texas Hill Country is not the best place for star-gazing, as we live in a pretty constant atmospheric soup of pollen and dust. And on most summer nights, low clouds stream up from the Gulf and pour over our heads from a few hours after sundown to near dawn. You have to get pretty far west into more desert-like areas to get consistently good skies for sky-watching. Like Fort Davis where the McDonald Observatory is - a mere 400+ driving miles from Austin, about half the width of the state.

 

Actually, this evening, the day after the eclipse event, the moonrise was spectacular - the moon an intense creamy yellow, with black bands of thin horizontal clouds setting it off, and the sky showing a bit of that magical dark, dark blue that is almost black. Sorcerer hat blue, if you know what I mean.

 

nat whilk ii

 

 

 

[rasputin1963]

Stunning, Ken... just fabulous.

[rasputin1963]

I love this kind of stuff. Here in Austin it was quite hazy, especially right when the moon came up, but we got some of the thrill. My son, who has a pretty decent reflecting telescope, drove a couple hundred miles up to past San Angelo just to get a good look with his 'scope.

 

Telescopes of pretty amazing power and sophistication are getting more affordable all the time - I would love to be a serious sky watcher, but I don't have the time for it. Unless I gave up something like writing songs and recording - fat chance of that.

 

The Texas Hill Country is not the best place for star-gazing, as we live in a pretty constant atmospheric soup of pollen and dust. And on most summer nights, low clouds stream up from the Gulf and pour over our heads from a few hours after sundown to near dawn. You have to get pretty far west into more desert-like areas to get consistently good skies for sky-watching. Like Fort Davis where the McDonald Observatory is - a mere 400+ driving miles from Austin, about half the width of the state.

 

Actually, this evening, the day after the eclipse event, the moonrise was spectacular - the moon an intense creamy yellow, with black bands of thin horizontal clouds setting it off, and the sky showing a bit of that magical dark, dark blue that is almost black. Sorcerer hat blue, if you know what I mean.

 

nat whilk ii

 

 

 

Exactly so, and beautifully described.

[Notes_Norton]

I've seen a number of lunar eclipses, but alas, it was too cloudy this time around. I was disappointed.

 

I usually like both naked eye and binoculars (25x)

 

I don't like the term "Supermoon" - too much hype. The perigee moon is only 7% bigger than the average moon. (The apogee moon is also 7% smaller.) 7% difference in my book is not "super". In fact, when I took electronics in college, the general engineering rule of thumb is anything under 10% is for all practical purposes the same.

 

If you go out on a perigee moon night, your eye and senses cannot tell if it is larger or smaller than the last full moon, in fact, you will probably perceive it as the same size. But then I supose the weatherman or weatherwoman on TV has to do something to create hyperbole to keep people watching.

 

Me? I find a perigee moon and any total lunar eclipse to be great without the hype. Perhaps next one around I'll have clear skies and no mosquitoes

 

I'm happy for all who got to enjoy it.

 

Insights, incites and a bit of a rant by Notes

[blue2blue]

 

I was relatively lucky, I guess. My pal out in the desert near Palm Springs said there was a haze that obscured things but I got an OK-ish snapshot with my cheapo snap cam. I walked down to the bay, taking my tripod -- but forgot the mount -- so I had to hold my breath and use my hand to clamp the cam down on the gimbal platform.

 

[Phil O'Keefe]

I got a new toy a bit early for my birthday... a new 8" Dobsonian telescope with a motorized GoTo mount. It's not as big as some of the huge monster Dobs that are available commercially now, but it's still a pretty darned decent light bucket. Here's a rather poor quality picture of it:

 

 

 

 

I really wanted to get some shots of the eclipse (even though I don't have any astrophotography tools for the telescope yet) but unfortunately most of it was obscured by clouds from here. I did manage to take a "through the eyepiece" shot last night with it - but using an unmounted iPhone 5, it was a bit disappointing compared to the view through the 2" 28mm eyepiece I was using at the time, which was much sharper and more detailed than what you see here...

 

 

 

One of these days I'd like to sign up for one of your night photography training sessions Ken. Are you going to be doing those on a semi-regular basis?

[UstadKhanAli]

I love this kind of stuff. Here in Austin it was quite hazy, especially right when the moon came up, but we got some of the thrill. My son, who has a pretty decent reflecting telescope, drove a couple hundred miles up to past San Angelo just to get a good look with his 'scope.

 

Telescopes of pretty amazing power and sophistication are getting more affordable all the time - I would love to be a serious sky watcher, but I don't have the time for it. Unless I gave up something like writing songs and recording - fat chance of that.

 

The Texas Hill Country is not the best place for star-gazing, as we live in a pretty constant atmospheric soup of pollen and dust. And on most summer nights, low clouds stream up from the Gulf and pour over our heads from a few hours after sundown to near dawn. You have to get pretty far west into more desert-like areas to get consistently good skies for sky-watching. Like Fort Davis where the McDonald Observatory is - a mere 400+ driving miles from Austin, about half the width of the state.

 

Actually, this evening, the day after the eclipse event, the moonrise was spectacular - the moon an intense creamy yellow, with black bands of thin horizontal clouds setting it off, and the sky showing a bit of that magical dark, dark blue that is almost black. Sorcerer hat blue, if you know what I mean.

 

nat whilk ii

 

 

 

I live in Los Angeles, so I have to drive out to the deserts or the mountains as well. But surprisingly, for such a huge city, it's actually not super far. An hour or so and you can easily observe the Milky Way. But most of the time, I'm going on 2-4 hour drives for most of my night sky photography shoots.

 

Not here, though. The moon was easily visible from anywhere around here....or could have been, anyway, if not for the clouds.

 

We had a lot of clouds. And even if there weren't clouds, it was hazy. i'm lucky I got anything at all. And if I didn't have the haze, those moons would have come out sharper for sure.

 

It did look really great last night. I was out walking around at night for about 45 minutes with my girlfriend, and we were in awe of the moon.

 

Balancing music and night photography is challenging, to say the least, but I somehow make it work.

[UstadKhanAli]

I've seen a number of lunar eclipses, but alas, it was too cloudy this time around. I was disappointed.

 

I usually like both naked eye and binoculars (25x)

 

I don't like the term "Supermoon" - too much hype. The perigee moon is only 7% bigger than the average moon. (The apogee moon is also 7% smaller.) 7% difference in my book is not "super". In fact, when I took electronics in college, the general engineering rule of thumb is anything under 10% is for all practical purposes the same.

 

If you go out on a perigee moon night, your eye and senses cannot tell if it is larger or smaller than the last full moon, in fact, you will probably perceive it as the same size. But then I supose the weatherman or weatherwoman on TV has to do something to create hyperbole to keep people watching.

 

Me? I find a perigee moon and any total lunar eclipse to be great without the hype. Perhaps next one around I'll have clear skies and no mosquitoes

 

I'm happy for all who got to enjoy it.

 

Insights, incites and a bit of a rant by Notes

 

I don't usually use the word "supermoon" because it overstates what's going on. But if I use perigee by itself, it doesn't really attract much attention. But being 14% larger than an apogee moon is fairly substantial, particularly if it's also 30% brighter.

 

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsystem/features/watchtheskies/live-feed-of-sundays-supermoon-eclipse.html

 

But regardless, I don't like overstating things too much. Some astronomers think it's alright because it gets people interested in heavenly bodies and so forth, and they think that's a good thing. But others feel that if someone hears the term "supermoon" and runs out and it looks only slightly bigger and brighter than a regular moon, they may be disappointed.

 

I don't know.

 

Regardless, this occurrence was obviously quite special, and if the people around me were any indication, despite the clouds, it did not disappoint.

 

 

[UstadKhanAli]

I got a new toy a bit early for my birthday... a new 8" Dobsonian telescope with a motorized GoTo mount. It's not as big as some of the huge monster Dobs that are available commercially now, but it's still a pretty darned decent light bucket. Here's a rather poor quality picture of it:

 

 

 

 

I really wanted to get some shots of the eclipse (even though I don't have any astrophotography tools for the telescope yet) but unfortunately most of it was obscured by clouds from here. I did manage to take a "through the eyepiece" shot last night with it - but using an unmounted iPhone 5, it was a bit disappointing compared to the view through the 2" 28mm eyepiece I was using at the time, which was much sharper and more detailed than what you see here...

 

 

 

One of these days I'd like to sign up for one of your night photography training sessions Ken. Are you going to be doing those on a semi-regular basis?

 

Wow, nice telescope! Looks good!

 

I used a regular ol' Nikon lens/camera, nothing remarkable. I just locked it down real hard on my tripod and hoped for the best. But there's really nothing remarkable about the equipment I used at all...other than that it's a camera that is not attached to a phone.

 

I don't have any plans to do another night sky photography workshop, Phil, but if I do, I will try and remember to let you know about it. I haven't done any in about a year because of all the BS going on in my life last year, but now that things are going much better, I may do some in the future. I don't know yet.

[UstadKhanAli]

I was relatively lucky, I guess. My pal out in the desert near Palm Springs said there was a haze that obscured things but I got an OK-ish snapshot with my cheapo snap cam. I walked down to the bay, taking my tripod -- but forgot the mount -- so I had to hold my breath and use my hand to clamp the cam down on the gimbal platform.

 

 

You can still clearly tell what's going on with the moon, so great!

 

Thank you to you and everyone else for the kind comments.

 

HC has been given me tons of grief. Keep getting error messages when I post and have to type everything again and again, so I'm gonna come back later when it's less buggy.

[Phil O'Keefe]

I'm sorry to hear you're having issues posting Ken. What computer / OS / browser are you using?

[UstadKhanAli]

I'm sorry to hear you're having issues posting Ken. What computer / OS / browser are you using?

 

Mac Pro 1,1 running OS 10.6.8 with Google Chrome 45.0.2454.101 (up to date). What happens is that it either will not allow me to type at all, gives me an error message when I try to quote someone, or simply won't post. It's been doing this at my work as well, and that is an iMac running OS 10.7, also with an up-to-date version of Chrome.

[Notes_Norton]

<...>

 

But regardless, I don't like overstating things too much. Some astronomers think it's alright because it gets people interested in heavenly bodies and so forth, and they think that's a good thing. But others feel that if someone hears the term "supermoon" and runs out and it looks only slightly bigger and brighter than a regular moon, they may be disappointed.<...>

 

 

It's a good point about getting them interested. But after the "Mars is going to be as big as the moon" hoaxes, and a perigee moon that the average non-sky watcher can't tell from an apogee moon (not enough experience) I personally think it's like 'crying wolf' and eventually those people who got disappointed a few times won't come out at all.

 

Plus, I just get tired of everything being hyped. For me, real is good.

 

I go out to see them all, and some of the better meteor showers, and if I didn't know it was a perigee moon, I couldn't in all certainty tell you if it is a perigee moon or not. I live on a relatively dark street and love the night sky. I also mourn the dark skies of my youth, when you used to be able to see the milky way from the suburbs.

 

Insights and incites by Notes

[nat whilk II]

I got a new toy a bit early for my birthday... a new 8" Dobsonian telescope with a motorized GoTo mount. It's not as big as some of the huge monster Dobs that are available commercially now, but it's still a pretty darned decent light bucket. Here's a rather poor quality picture of it:

 

 

Hey - that's the same telescope my son has (sans the tracking motor and other digital stuff.) Orion Starquest 8" Dobsonian. Except that we bought it in 1999 when he was ten years old and the prices were higher. $526 I think it was back then. Without the motor, the moon strolls across offstage every few minutes - but it's not that big a deal with the really far away stuff.

 

I love photography of celestial phenomena - but the real-time experience through a scope has that something extra.

 

You geeks have probably seen this - but if not, it's a cool little video of some guys who made a "model" of the solar system out in the desert - to scale:

 

[YOUTUBE]zR3Igc3Rhfg[/YOUTUBE]

 

nat whilk ii