[Leica] I got published in Sky & Telescope magazine, but...

[pdzwig at summaventures.com (Peter Dzwig)]

Got to say Howard that I for one like it...might have trimmed a few 
branches on the extreme left, but...

I think they should have gone pretty much with your take. But then that 
is Editors for you.

Peter

On 15/03/15 20:03, Howard Ritter wrote:
> Last October I took some nice photos of the fully eclipsed Moon setting 
> towards trees low in the west. It was as the sky was just beginning to be 
> light enough that the sky was a deep, dark blue in an exposure that 
> captured the Moon nicely, but not so bright that the exposure would have 
> to be too short to capture stars as well or so bright that the trees in 
> the foreground would be illuminated. Here?s a link to my original photo:
>
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hlritter/Blood+Moon/Blood+Moon+in+Stars.jpg.html
>  
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hlritter/Blood+Moon/Blood+Moon+in+Stars.jpg.html>
>   Please view full.
>
> I think it?s an attractive composition, and it nicely captures something 
> not often seen in astroimages?five distance scales: the tree, the sky, the 
> Moon, Uranus (brightest point of light to the left of the Moon), and the 
> stars. I submitted it to S&T noting these aspects of the image, both of 
> which require inclusion of much more than the Moon to appreciate. The 
> photo, or a small part of it, will be published in the May issue. The 
> issue hasn?t been released yet, and there?s no link to the image, but I 
> got a pre-publication copy because my photo was chosen for publication.
>
> I was surprised to find it cropped down to just a 2 x 2" ?head shot? of 
> the Moon, with barely any surrounding sky or sense of its color, and no 
> tree, Uranus, or stars. Taken with a 400mm zoom, this image was not meant 
> to be a detailed view of the eclipsed face of the Moon, but rather was a 
> study of the eclipsed Moon low in the sky in a field that included 
> terrestrial, planetary, and stellar objects as well. It?s a composition 
> that, esthetically and scientifically, works only if the whole is present. 
> Cropped down to a passport photo of the Moon, it?s too low-res and 
> pedestrian to be worth publishing, IMHO.
>
> I?m certainly flattered, and grateful to S&T for giving me my first 
> magazine image publication, but disappointed in the way they chose to do 
> it. Am I being too critical? Or is this just another example of the 
> eternal gulf between "content creators" and editors?
>
> ?howard
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>