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

[Mark Rabiner]

2 seconds an amazingly long exposure for the fast moving moon.
The blur is  plainly evident in the image even quite small.

http://forums.popphoto.com/showthread.php?338537-Moon-minimum-shutter-speed


On 3/16/15 5:13 AM, "Peter Dzwig" <pdzwig at summaventures.com> wrote:

> 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. Here¹s a link to my original
> photo:
>
> 
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hlritter/Blood+Moon/Blood+Moon+in+Stars.jpg.h
> tml 
> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hlritter/Blood+Moon/Blood+Moon+in+Stars.jpg.
> html>  Please view full.
>
> I think it¹s 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 hasn¹t been released yet, and there¹s 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"
> ³head shot² 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. It¹s a composition that,
> esthetically and scientifically, works only if the whole is present. Cropped
> down to a passport photo of the Moon, it¹s too low-res and pedestrian to be
> worth publishing, IMHO.
>
> I¹m 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
>

_______________________________________________
Leica Users
> Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




-- 
Mark William Rabiner
Photographer
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/